Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

12-057 - Bruner et al v. Conway et al

Download Files


Document in Context
12-057 - Bruner et al v. Conway et al
February 25, 2013
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: that Dfts' mtn to dismiss (Record No. 26) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 2/25/2013. (AKR)cc: COR
June 13, 2013
PDF | More
but not limited to, in the matter of Commonwealth v. Wildcat Moving, No. 13-CI-645 in the Franklin Circuit Court. 3. The Court hereby WAIVES the requirement of security under Rule 65(c) of the FRCP because the preliminary injunction will require the Defendants to sustain little or no cost or damage and because the suit is brought in the public interest. See Moltan Co. v. Eagles Picher Indus., 55 F.3d 1171, 1176 (6th Cir. 1995). 4. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to immediately forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion (via Facsimile) to the Franklin Circuit Court. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 6/13/2013.(CBD)cc: COR, Franklin Circuit Court Clerk via facsimile Modified typo on 6/14/2013 (CBD). MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Plaintiffs' First Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Motion for Preliminary Injunction 43 is GRANTED. 2. Effective immediately, and subject to subsequent orders from this Court, the Defendants, as well as their attorneys, agents, officers, representatives, and employees, are ENJOINED from enforcing or attempting to enforce against Plaintiffs Raleigh Bruner and Wildcat Moving, LLC, the Certificate requirement of KRS § 281.615(1), including,
February 3, 2014
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Plaintiffs Raleigh Bruner's and Wildcat Moving, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment 72 is GRANTED with respect to their claims that KRS § 281.615 et seq., and implementing regulations, violate the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Plaintiffs' remaining claims are DISMISSED. 2. The Defendants and their agents, officers, and successors, are ENJOINED from enforcing KRS § 281.615 et seq., and any implementing regulations, as a "Competitor's Veto" as described above in the context of the moving service industry. 3. All claims having been resolved, this matter is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court's docket. 4. A separate Judgment shall issue this date. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 2/3/2014.(CBD)cc: COR