Case: Madrigal v. The County of Monterey

5:06-cv-01407 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Feb. 24, 2006

Closed Date: April 24, 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case is about whether English-only, citizen-sponsored petitions and materials, which were approved by Monterey County, California for inclusion on local election ballots, were unlawful under the language requirements of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The Initiative Cases A group of citizens in Monterey County (the “County”) circulated an initiative petition (the “Initiative”) which, if passed, would have presented for voter consideration an amendment of certain zoning and land devel…

This case is about whether English-only, citizen-sponsored petitions and materials, which were approved by Monterey County, California for inclusion on local election ballots, were unlawful under the language requirements of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act.

The Initiative Cases

A group of citizens in Monterey County (the “County”) circulated an initiative petition (the “Initiative”) which, if passed, would have presented for voter consideration an amendment of certain zoning and land development provisions of the Monterey County General Plan and the requirement of a public election for future zoning changes. In January of 2006, the proponents of the Initiative filed a notice with the County Elections Department of their intent to circulate the petition and a copy of the proposed final Initiative. The County approved the form and content of the petition for circulation among voters and provided the approved petition and materials to the proponents for publication in a newspaper and for circulation to registered voters. All of these materials were only printed in English.

1.      Madrigal Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-01407)

On February 24, 2006, a group of Spanish-speaking citizens opposing the Initiative (the “Madrigal Plaintiffs”) filed a lawsuit against the County in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Represented by private counsel, the Madrigal Plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment clarifying that the English-only materials violated Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act because they were not also made available in Spanish and requested an injunction against further processing of the Initiative. The case was assigned to Judge James Ware.

Later that month, on February 28, after receiving a legal report from Monterey County Counsel addressing procedural and substantive concerns with respect to the content and form of the Initiative under both federal and California law, including the lack of Spanish materials, the Board of Supervisors voted not to place the Initiative on the ballot.

2.      Melendez Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-01730)

On March 1, 2006, represented by private counsel, a separate group of plaintiffs - the proponents of the Initiative (the “Melendez Plaintiffs”) - filed a mandamus action in the Superior Court of the County of Monterey to compel the County to place the Initiative on the ballot. Since the requisite number of qualified signatures had been obtained, the Melendez Plaintiffs alleged that the County had a ministerial duty to place the Initiative on the ballot. 

On March 7, 2006, the County removed the Melendez action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that it refused to place the Initiative on the ballot because the Initiative was inconsistent with Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The case was also assigned to Judge James Ware.

On March 14, 2006, the Melendez Plaintiffs moved for a temporary restraining order, and three days later the Madrigal Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction. On March 20, 2006, the Court consolidated the two suits into a single action captioned In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter, which continued on the Madrigal docket (5:06-cv-01407). 

Later that month, on March 23, the Court ruled in favor of the Madrigal Plaintiffs and permanently enjoined the County from processing, certifying or adopting the Initiative and from placing it on a ballot for a future County election unless or until first properly circulating it in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. 427 F.Supp.2d 958. The Melendez Plaintiffs immediately appealed this to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The Referendum Cases

Separately, on November 7, 2005, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors (“Board”) passed a resolution to amend certain provisions of the Monterey County General Plan, the Greater Salinas Area Land Use Plan, and the Rancho San Juan Area of Development Concentration Development Guidelines and Principles (“Resolution”). Opponents of the Resolution (the "Rancho Plaintiffs") began circulating a referendum against the Board's Resolution (the "Referendum"). These materials were also only printed in English. The Board initially ordered that the Referendum be placed on the June 2006 ballot.

1.      Rangel Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-02202)

In response, on March 27, 2006, opponents of the Referendum's materials (the "Rangel Plaintiffs") filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Represented by private counsel, they sought a declaration that that the Referendum was invalid under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act because its materials were printed and circulated only in English. As a result, on March 28, 2006, the Board withdrew the Referendum from the June 2006 ballot, citing the Ninth Circuit’s initial decision in Padilla v. Lever, 429 F.3d 910 (9th Cir. 2005), which held that the dual-language provision of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act required the Referendum’s materials to be in both English and Spanish.

The case was assigned to Judge James Ware. Later that year, on May 22, the parties agreed to stay the case while the Ninth Circuit reheard Padilla en banc.

2.      Rancho Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-02369)

On April 3, 2006, the Rancho Plaintiffs filed suit in the Superior Court of the County of Monterey. Represented by private counsel, they sought a declaratory judgment that the Referendum was proper and injunctive relief to compel the Board to put the Referendum to voters in the next election. Three days later, the case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The case was initially assigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel, but was reassigned on May 10, 2006 to Judge James Ware.

Later that year, on July 3, the Rancho Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction. On August 15, 2006 the Court denied the Rancho Plaintiffs' motion and stayed both Rangel and Rancho while the Ninth Circuit reheard Padilla en banc. 2006 WL 2355120.

Later that year, on October 25, Rancho was consolidated with Rangel as In re Monterey Referendum on the Rangel docket (5:06-cv-02202).

Consolidated Case

In September 2006, the Ninth Circuit issued its en banc ruling in Padilla, withdrawing its prior ruling. 463 F.3d 1046.

Two months later, on November 6, the Rancho Plaintiffs and the County both moved for summary judgment in In re Monterey Referendum. The next day, the Rangel Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment.

Later that month, on November 20, the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's injunction for the Madrigal Plaintiffs and remanded the case so the district court could decide how the Padilla decision bore on this case.

On December 18, 2006, the Rangel Plaintiffs moved, pursuant to Section 204 of the Voting Rights Act, which authorizes the Attorney General of the United States to institute an action to enforce Section 203, for the convening of a three-judge panel to hear the motions regarding the Referendum. Later that month, on December 27, 2006, the Court consolidated In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter and In re Monterey Referendum for pretrial purposes.

Based on the en banc ruling in Padilla, on February 6, 2007, the Madrigal Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their action against the County, without prejudice. This left both of the Referendum cases and the Melendez Plaintiffs’ Initiative case remaining for the Court’s consideration.

On February 7, 2007, the Rancho Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment and requested to enjoin the County to either repeal the Resolution of submit the Referendum to the voters. The Melendez Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment and requested to remand the case to state court or, in the alternative, compel the County to enact the Initiative in its entirety, or, in the alternative, submit the Initiative to the voters. The County requested for the Cout to dismiss the Melendez case since the controversy had been mooted by a promise to place the Initiative on the upcoming ballot. The following day, on February 8, the Rangel Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment.

In a March 29, 2007 decision, based largely on the en banc decision in Padilla, the Court denied the Rangel Plaintiffs’ request for the convening of a three-judge court. In so doing, the Court found that the Rangel Plaintiffs’ suit, a private action and not one brought on behalf of the Attorney General of the United States, did not arise under Section 204 of the Voting Rights Act. 2007 WL 9811086.

As for the parties’ cross-summary judgment motions, the Court found that (1) the Referendum at issue was privately initiated, drafted, and circulated by its proponents and, thus, was not subject to the dual-language requirement of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act; and (2) given the need for judicial economy and the procedural posture of the case, the Court would not remand the Melendez Plaintiffs’ case back to state court. The Court also acknowledged that with the Madrigal Plaintiffs’ dismissal of their claim and the County’s decision to place the Initiative on the upcoming ballot, it would Grant the Melendez Plaintiffs’ injunction to require the County to submit the Initiative to the voters in the upcoming election.

As a result of the Court's findings, it ordered that the County submit both the Initiative and the Referendum in their entirety and without alteration to the voters of the County at the June 5, 2007 County election. 

The following month, on April 6, the Rangel Plaintiffs moved to alter the judgment and for an injunction pending appeal. A few days later, the County also moved to alter the judgment. Later that month, on April 26, the Court denied the motion for an injunction pending appeal. 2007 WL 9811085. Soon after, on April 30, the Rangel Plaintiffs appealed the summary judgment order to the Ninth Circuit. The next month, on May 17, the Court denied the County's motion to alter the judgment. 2007 WL 1455869.

On July 30, 2007, the Melendez Plaintiffs moved for attorneys' fees; the Rancho Plaintiffs also moved for attorneys' fees. The Court granted the motions on November 9 of that year, 2007 WL 3342796, but the parties settled out of court for attorneys' fees.

The following year, on April 10, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot. The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Derek Centola (12/29/2023)

Related Cases

Melendez v. Board of Supervisors of The County of Monterey, Northern District of California (2006)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5748792/parties/in-re-county-of-monterey-initiative-matter/


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff

Austin, Mark J. (California)

Avila, Joaquin Guadalupe (California)

Flanders, Jason Robert (California)

Ramirez, John Andrew (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Roberts, Stephen Norvell (California)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

5:06-cv-01407

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

Complaint
3

5:06-cv-01407

Related Case Order

Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al

March 13, 2006

March 13, 2006

Order/Opinion
18

5:06-cv-01407

Madrigal Plaintiffs' Reply Brief

Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief

2006 WL 2006

17

5:06-cv-01407

Defendants’ Reply to Madrigal Case Plaintiffs’ Motion For Injunction

Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief
24

5:06-cv-01407

Answer To Complaint for Declaratory Relief And Injunctive Relief Of Madrigal Plaintiffs

In Re County Of Monterey Initiative Matter

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief
22

5:06-cv-01407

Order Consolidating Cases

In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Order/Opinion

427 F.Supp.2d 427

27

5:06-cv-01407

Declaratory Judgment and Permanent Injunction

In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

Order/Opinion
26

5:06-cv-01407

Order Re: Motions For Injunctive Relief and Declaratory Judgments

In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

Order/Opinion

427 F.Supp.2d 427

31

5:06-cv-01407

Notice of Appeal and Representation Statement

In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter; Melendez, et al. v. Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey

March 27, 2006

March 27, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief
1

06-cv-02202

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Rangel v. The County of Monterey

March 27, 2006

March 27, 2006

Complaint

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5748792/in-re-county-of-monterey-initiative-matter/

Last updated March 17, 2024, 3:20 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, CLASS ACTION; (Summons Served); against The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo ( Filing fee $ 250, receipt number 5514037.). Filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006) Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2006 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/26/2006)

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

Clearinghouse
2

ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 6/21/2006. Case Management Conference set for 6/28/2006 02:30 PM. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006) (Entered: 02/26/2006)

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

PACER

Summons Issued as to The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006)

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

PACER

CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006)

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

PACER
3

ORDER RELATING CASE. Case C06-01730 is related to this case. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/13/06. (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/13/2006) (Entered: 03/13/2006)

March 13, 2006

March 13, 2006

Clearinghouse
4

CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/14/2006) (Entered: 03/14/2006)

March 14, 2006

March 14, 2006

PACER
5

ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge James Ware for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg remains as the referral judge to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on March 14, 2006(bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/14/2006) (Entered: 03/14/2006)

March 14, 2006

March 14, 2006

PACER
6

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction or Alternatively Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. Motion Hearing set for 3/21/2006 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

1 Affidavit Signature Attestation

View on PACER

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
7

Declaration of John A. Ramirez In Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and In Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit B# 2 Exhibit Exhibit C# 3 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
8

Declaration of Maria Buell in Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit B# 2 Exhibit Exhibit C# 3 Exhibit Exhibit F# 4 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
9

EXHIBITS re 8 Declaration in Support, Exhibit E to Maria Buell Declaration filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Related document(s) 8 ) (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
10

Declaration of Sabas Rangel In Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement English Translation of Declaration# 2 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
11

Declaration of Rosario Madrigal In Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement English Translation of Declaration# 2 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
12

Proposed Order re 6 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction or Alternatively Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
13

Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time on Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. Motion Hearing set for 3/21/2006 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
14

Declaration of Mark J. Austin in Support of Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time on Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
15

Proposed Order re 13 Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time on Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
16

AFFIDAVIT of Service of Preliminary Injunction Documents by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)

March 17, 2006

March 17, 2006

PACER
17

Reply Memorandum TO MADRIGAL CASE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR INJUNCTION filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Clearinghouse
18

Reply Memorandum in Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and Replying to Melendez Plaintiffs' March 17th Memorandum filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Clearinghouse
19

Proposed Order Denying Madrigal Case Plaintiffs' Request for Injunction by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

PACER
20

Declaration of JOHN A. RAMIREZ in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

PACER
21

Declaration of Maria Buell in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

PACER
22

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES. ALL FUTURE PAPERS SHALL BE FILED IN C06-1407. THE CLERK SHALL CLOSE C06-1730 JW. IN ALL FUTURE FILINGS, THE CAPTION SHALL READ: IN RE COUNTY OF MONTEREY INITIATIVE MATTER. Signed by Judge James Ware on March 20, 2006. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2006) Modified on 3/22/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Clearinghouse
23

ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand TO VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE AND COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF OF MELENDEZ PLAINTIFFS byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

PACER
24

ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OF MADRIGAL PLAINTIFFS byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

March 20, 2006

March 20, 2006

Clearinghouse
25

Minute Entry: Preliminary Injunction Hearing held on 3/21/2006 before James Ware (Date Filed: 3/21/2006). (Court Reporter Peter Torreano.) (mp, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 3/21/2006) (Entered: 03/21/2006)

March 21, 2006

March 21, 2006

PACER
26

ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS. by Judge James Ware. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

Clearinghouse
27

DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION signed by Judge James Ware. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

Clearinghouse
28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel (The Courty of Monterey) (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

PACER
29

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel (The Board of Supervisors of the Courty of Monterey) (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

PACER
30

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel (Tony Anchundo) (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

PACER
31

NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 26 Order on Ex Parte Application, 27 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction by William. Melendez. Filing fee $ 255, receipt number 5514243. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/27/2006) Additional attachment(s) added on 3/28/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/27/2006)

March 27, 2006

March 27, 2006

Clearinghouse
32

TRANSCRIPT DESIGNATION and Ordering Form by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County for proceedings held on 03/14/2006 in case number C06-1730 JW Court Reporter Irene Rodriguez; 03/21/2006 in case number C06-1407 JW, Court Reporter Peter Torreano before Judge James Ware.. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/29/2006) Modified text on 3/29/2006, to reflect the hearing for 3/14/06.(cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/29/2006)

March 29, 2006

March 29, 2006

PACER

Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheets case number C06-1407 JW and C06-1730 JW to US Court of Appeals re 31 Notice of Appeal, (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/29/2006) Modified on 3/29/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF).

March 29, 2006

March 29, 2006

PACER
33

REPORTERS TRANSCRIPT filed for hearing date of March 21, 2006 before Judge James Ware, re 31 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Peter Torreano. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2006) (Entered: 05/08/2006)

May 5, 2006

May 5, 2006

PACER

Certificate of Record Mailed to USCA re appeal 31 Notice of Appeal, : and Reporters Transcript for hearing of 3/16/06 filed in docket number C06-1730 JW (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2006)

May 5, 2006

May 5, 2006

PACER
34

USCA JUDGMENT as to 31 Notice of Appeal IS VACATED AND REMANDED. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2006) (Entered: 11/22/2006)

Nov. 22, 2006

Nov. 22, 2006

Clearinghouse
35

ORDER of USCA as to 31 Notice of Appeal. The District Court's 3/23/06 order and declaratory judgment are VACATED. This appeal is REMANDED TO THE District Court. The clerk shall ISSUE THE MANDATE forthwith. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2006) (Entered: 11/22/2006)

Nov. 22, 2006

Nov. 22, 2006

Clearinghouse
36

CLERKS Letter Spreading Mandate to Counsel (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2006) (Entered: 11/22/2006)

Nov. 22, 2006

Nov. 22, 2006

PACER
37

MOTION for an order to Consolidate both sets if cases C06-2369 JW and C06-2202 JW, C06-1407 JW, C06-1730 JW Cases filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 11/28/2006) Modified text on 11/30/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/28/2006)

Nov. 28, 2006

Nov. 28, 2006

Clearinghouse
38

Declaration of Stephen N. Roberts in Support of 37 MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Related document(s) 37 ) (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 11/28/2006) (Entered: 11/28/2006)

Nov. 28, 2006

Nov. 28, 2006

PACER
39

Proposed Order re 37 MOTION to Consolidate Cases by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 11/28/2006) (Entered: 11/28/2006)

Nov. 28, 2006

Nov. 28, 2006

PACER
40

Memorandum in Opposition re 37 MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed byRancho San Juan Opposition Coalition. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 11/29/2006) (Entered: 11/29/2006)

Nov. 29, 2006

Nov. 29, 2006

Clearinghouse
41

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; SETTING CASE MANANGENT CONFERENCE. Telephonic Initial Case Management Conference set for 12/13/2006 10:00 AM. Please see Order for specifics. Signed by Judge James Ware on 12/7/2006. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/7/2006) (Entered: 12/07/2006)

Dec. 7, 2006

Dec. 7, 2006

Clearinghouse
42

Minute Entry: Further Case Management Conference held on 12/13/2006 before James Ware (Date Filed: 12/13/2006). Please see Minute Order for specifics. (Court Reporter Not Reported.) (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/13/2006) (Entered: 12/13/2006)

Dec. 13, 2006

Dec. 13, 2006

PACER
43

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES C06-1407 JW and C06-2202 JW. The consolidation is for the purposes of pretrial motions ONLY. The cases shall maintain their separate designated case names and; SETTING NEW HEARING DATE for all motions is specially set for 2/27/07 at 9:00am in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge James Ware on 12/27/2006. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/27/2006) Modified on 12/28/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/27/2006)

Dec. 27, 2006

Dec. 27, 2006

Clearinghouse
44

STIPULATION and Proposed Order Regarding Briefing Schedule on Summary Judgment Motions by William. Melendez, Maria Buell, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, The County of Monterey, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo, Sabas Rangel. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/5/2007) (Entered: 02/05/2007)

Feb. 5, 2007

Feb. 5, 2007

PACER
45

STIPULATION of Dismissal for Madrigal Action Only, Case No. 5:06-cv-1407 by Rosario Madrigal. (Attachments: # 1 Signature Page (Declarations/Stipulations))(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 2/5/2007) (Entered: 02/05/2007)

Feb. 5, 2007

Feb. 5, 2007

PACER
46

ORDER GRANTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS re 44 Stipulation, filed by The County of Monterey,Carolyn Anderson, William Melendez, Sabas Rangel, Maria Buell, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition. The Opening Brief is Due on February 7 2007. Opposition and Closing Briefs will be due on February 13 2007. The Opening Brief may be 35 pages rather than 25. Signed by Judge James Ware on 2/6/2007. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2007) (Entered: 02/06/2007)

Feb. 6, 2007

Feb. 6, 2007

Clearinghouse
47

ORDER GRANTING VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL re 45 Stipulation of Dismissal filed by Rosario Madrigal. Signed by Judge James Ware on 2/6/2007. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2007) (Entered: 02/06/2007)

Feb. 6, 2007

Feb. 6, 2007

Clearinghouse
48

Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Summary Judgment in Referendum Cases and in Support of Dismissal in the Melendez Initiative Case filed byThe County of Monterey, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

Clearinghouse
49

Memoradum of Points and Authorities in Support of Summary Judgment in Referendum Cases and in Support of Dismissal in the Melendez Initiative Case filed by The County of Monterey, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/7/2007) Modified text on 2/8/2007, document posted is an memoradum, not a motion (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

Clearinghouse
50

MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell, William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

Clearinghouse
51

Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher in Support of 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

PACER
52

Declaration of Chris Fitz in Support of 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

PACER
53

MEMORANDUM in Support re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

Clearinghouse
54

Proposed Order re: Motion for Summary Judgment by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

PACER
55

Memorandum in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Remand and Rancho San Juan Plaintiffs 50 Motion for Summary Judgment; and in Response to Rangel Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007, (Counsel used incorrect event) - Correct event is opposition, not a motion. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

Clearinghouse
56

exhibit E to 48 Request for Judicial Notice filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007, Counsel used incorrect event) - Correct event is exhibit, not motion. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

PACER
57

Proposed Order on Motions to be consolidated by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

PACER
58

Memorandum in Opposition to County Defendants' 55 Motions for Summary Judgment and Rangel motions filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007 LINK TO MOTION.(cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

Clearinghouse
59

Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher in Support of 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Supplemental) filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/13/2007) (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

PACER
60

Declaration of Ventura County Clerk-Recorder Registrar of Voters Philip J. Schmit filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified text on 2/14/2007, to conform with document posted by counsel. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

PACER
61

Minute Entry: Motion Hearing held on 2/27/2007 before James Ware. Matters taken under submission after oral arguments. (Date Filed: 2/27/2007) re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Carolyn Anderson, William. Melendez,, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Court Reporter Irene Rodriguez.) (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 2/27/2007) Modified on 2/27/2007 (ecg, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/27/2007)

Feb. 27, 2007

Feb. 27, 2007

PACER
62

Proposed Order re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Statement of Reasons by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/2/2007) (Entered: 03/02/2007)

March 2, 2007

March 2, 2007

PACER
63

Proposed Order re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Statement of Reasons by Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/2/2007) (Entered: 03/02/2007)

March 2, 2007

March 2, 2007

PACER
64

Proposed Order re 57 Proposed Order on Motions in Consolidated Cases; Explanation of Reasons for Order by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/7/2007) (Entered: 03/07/2007)

March 7, 2007

March 7, 2007

PACER
65

RESPONSE to County Defendants re 64 Proposed Order on motions in consolidated by Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/13/2007) Modified on 3/20/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/13/2007)

March 13, 2007

March 13, 2007

Clearinghouse
66

ORDER DENYING RANGEL PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR THE CONVENING OF A THREE JUDGE COURT; GRANTING THE MELENDEZ AND THE RANCHO SAN JUAN OPPOSITION COALITION PLAINTIFFS' MOITON FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND ORDERING THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY TO SUBMIT THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM TO VOTERS OF MONTEREY COUNTY AT THE JUNE 5, 2007 COUNTY ELECTION by Judge James Ware granting 50 Motion for Summary Judgment (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/29/2007) (Entered: 03/29/2007)

March 29, 2007

March 29, 2007

Clearinghouse
67

SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge James Ware on March 28, 2007. (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/29/2007) (Entered: 03/29/2007)

March 29, 2007

March 29, 2007

Clearinghouse
68

Memorandum in Opposition Response to Rangel Plaintiffs Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

Clearinghouse
69

Declaration of Susan Orman filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

PACER
70

Declaration of Stephen N. Roberts filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

PACER
71

Memorandum in Opposition to Rangel Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal filed byRancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

Clearinghouse
72

MOTION to Alter Judgment Notice of Motion and Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/12/2007) (Entered: 04/12/2007)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

Clearinghouse
73

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment re 72 filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/12/2007) Modified on 4/13/2007 (cfe, Court Staff). (Entered: 04/12/2007)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

Clearinghouse
74

Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment re 72 by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/12/2007) Modified on 4/13/2007 (cfe, Court Staff). (Entered: 04/12/2007)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

PACER
75

ORDER Denying Rangel Plaintiffs' Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal. Signed by Judge James Ware on 4/25/2007. (jwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2007) (Entered: 04/26/2007)

April 26, 2007

April 26, 2007

Clearinghouse
76

Memorandum in Opposition re 72 MOTION to Alter Judgment Notice of Motion and Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 4/30/2007) (Entered: 04/30/2007)

April 30, 2007

April 30, 2007

Clearinghouse
77

Reply in support of Defendants' 72 Motion to Clarify 66 order or Alter Judgment filed by The County of Monterey. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 5/7/2007) Modified on 5/7/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 05/07/2007)

May 7, 2007

May 7, 2007

Clearinghouse
78

Declaration of Gary Greenfield in Support of Defendants' 81 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Awards of Attorneys' Fees and Costs filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) Modified text on 10/12/2007,(counsel failed to link to which document relates to) motion for attorneys fees has not been posted in this case. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/01/2007)

Oct. 1, 2007

Oct. 1, 2007

PACER
79

OBJECTIONS to Declarations of Michael Strumwasser and Michael Rubin in Case Numbers C 06-01730 JW and C06-02369JW by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) (Entered: 10/01/2007)

Oct. 1, 2007

Oct. 1, 2007

PACER
80

Declaration of Sophie N. Froelich In Support of Defendants' 81 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Awards of Attorneys' Fees and Costs filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) Modified on 10/12/2007,(counsel failed to link to which document relates to) *** motion for attorneys fees has not been posted in this case. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/01/2007)

Oct. 1, 2007

Oct. 1, 2007

PACER
81

MEMORANDUM in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motions for Awards of Attorneys' Fees and Costs filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) Modified on 10/12/2007,(counsel failed to link *** motion for attorneys fees has not been posted in this case. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/01/2007)

Oct. 1, 2007

Oct. 1, 2007

Clearinghouse
82

Reply Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 10/8/2007) Modified on 10/9/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/08/2007)

Oct. 8, 2007

Oct. 8, 2007

PACER
83

OBJECTIONS to re 78 Declaration in Support, by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 10/8/2007) (Entered: 10/08/2007)

Oct. 8, 2007

Oct. 8, 2007

PACER
84

Reply Memorandum in Support of *** Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs said motion has NOT been E-Filed in this case filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 10/8/2007) Modified text on 10/9/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/08/2007)

Oct. 8, 2007

Oct. 8, 2007

Clearinghouse

FILE LOCATED AT FEDERAL RECORDS CENTER (FRC) San Bruno, CA. Accession #; 021-07-0061; Location #; 735513; Box #; 163. (pmc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2007)

Oct. 26, 2007

Oct. 26, 2007

PACER
85

ORDER by Judge James Ware finding as moot 72 Motion to Alter Judgment (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2008) (Entered: 03/18/2008)

March 18, 2008

March 18, 2008

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Election/Voting Rights

Special Collection(s):

Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 24, 2006

Closing Date: April 24, 2008

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

A group of Spanish-speaking citizens of Monterey County, California

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Monterey County, California, County

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Voting Rights Act, section 203 (language minority provision), 52 U.S.C. § 10503 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 1973aa-1a)

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Non-settlement Outcome

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Order Duration: 2006 - 2006

Issues

Discrimination Basis:

Language discrimination

Affected Language(s):

Spanish

Voting:

Election administration

Voting: General & Misc.

Voting: Physical/Effective Access