The United States Department of Justice Department of Justice SealF The United States Department of Justice
Search The Site
 

Appellate Briefs and Opinions Banner

Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases

  • Veasey v. Perry (5th Cir.) - Appellee
    • The district court properly denied True the Vote's motion because it failed to satisfy three of the four requirements for mandatory intervention
    • The motion to expedite is dilatory
    • The motion for a stay is procedurally improper

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee 06/02/14
    Response in Opposition to Motion to Expedite and For a Stay 05/15/14
  • Brumfield v. Louisiana State Board of Education (5th Cir.) - Intervenor-Appellee
    • Movants have no interest in the proceedings that warrants their intervention, since the United States seeks only information regarding the program's effects

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 2014 WL 1395663 04/10/14
    Brief as Intervenor-Appellee 03/06/14
  • United States v. Diaz-Castro (1st Cir.) - Plaintiff-Appellee
    • The Court should dismiss Diaz-Castro's appeals because it lacks jurisdiction over the appeals and the appeals present no substantial question
    • The Court should deny his motion for a preliminary injunction pending appeal as moot and because it fails to satisfy the four-factor test for injunctions

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision 01/17/14
    Motion to Dismiss 12/20/13
    Response to Motion Seeking Injunction Pending Appeal 12/20/13
  • United States v. Territory of the Virgin Islands (3d Cir.) - Appellee
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the motion to intervene on timeliness grounds and because the United States adequately represented the inmates' interests

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 2014 WL 1395669 04/11/14
    Brief as Appellee 05/28/13
  • United States v. New Orleans (5th Cir.) - Plaintiff-Appellee
    • The would-be intervenors have not met the criteria for intervention as of right
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying their motions for permissive intervention

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 540 F. App'x 380 09/27/13
    Brief as Appellee 02/19/13
  • United States v. New Jersey (3d Cir.) - Appellee
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for intervention
    • The court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to hear a challenge by nonparties to the district court's approval of the consent decree

     
    Document Date 
    Certiorari denied, 134 S. Ct. 529 (United States waived response to the petition for a writ of certiorari) (S. Ct.) 11/04/13
    Court of Appeals Decision, 522 F. App'x 167 06/13/13
    Brief as Appellee 01/23/13
  • United States v. California (9th Cir.) - Plaintiff-Appellee
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for intervention on timeliness grounds

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 538 F. App'x 759 08/16/13
    Brief as Appellee 06/22/12
  • Benjamin v. Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (3d Cir.) – Amicus
    • Properly understood, Olmstead establishes community placement as the default for people for whom community placement is appropriate but who cannot express a preference either for or against community placement
    • The class certified in this case meets the requirements of Rule 23

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 701 F.3d 938 12/12/12
    Brief as Amicus 04/05/12
  • Fisher & Mendoza v. Tucson Unified School District (9th Cir.) - Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee
    • Arizona's second motion for reconsideration is to be reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard and that the motion was properly denied
    • As Arizona lacks a significantly protectable interest in this case, the outcome of the case did not impair Arizona's ability to protect its interests
    • Arizona's interests were adequately represented
    • The motion was untimely
    • The district court failed to follow Supreme Court precedent governing termination of court oversight of a desegregation decree in reaching its decision to grant unitary status and terminate this case

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee 11/13/13
    Court of Appeals Decision , reported at 652 F.3d 1131 07/19/11
    Brief as Plaintiff-Intervenor 04/29/11
  • United States v. New York Board of Elections & Nassau County Board of Elections (2d Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court was well within its discretion in denying the County intervention and that the new facts that arose following the United States' motion to enforce did not establish that the County has a cognizable interest in the litigation or that the State cannot adequately represent those interests
    • Nassau County has not met the four factors required to obtain a stay pending appeal
    • Nassau is bound by the district court's finding and Nassau's previous position that HAVA requires the replacement of New York State's lever machines
    • HAVA clearly prohibits the type of lever voting machine Nassau County wants to use

     
    Document Date 
    Order Denying Stay, Affirming Injunction, and Disposing Appeal 09/07/10
    Brief as Appellee 08/16/10
    Response opposing motion for stay 07/01/10
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], (unpublished) available at 312 F. App'x 353 04/15/08
    Letter Brief as Appellee [PDF] 02/06/08
  • Keys v. United States & Covington County School District (5th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that appellants' motion to intervene was untimely
    • Even if appellants' motion to intervene were timely, the district court correctly concluded that appellants are not entitled to intervention as of right

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 02/16/07
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 499 F.3d 464 09/05/07
  • Hollywood Community Synagogue & United States v. City of Hollywood (11th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court did not err in denying appellants' motion to intervene
    • Appellants cannot challenge the entry of the consent decree on the ground that the district court should first have held a hearing

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 10/25/06
    Court of Appeals Decision, 254 F. App'x 769 (unpublished) 11/20/07
  • United States v. Texas (5th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court had jurisdiction over this controversy
    • The district court properly allowed Hearne Independent School District to intervene in this action
    • This court should affirm the district court's injunction against TEA
    • This court should affirm the district court's injunction against Mumford Independent School District

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 10/13/05
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 457 F.3d 472 07/24/06
  • Graham & United States v. Evangeline Parish School Board (5th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Because intervention was properly denied, the appeal should be dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 10/21/04
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], 132 Fed. Appx. 507 (unpublished) 05/17/05
  • United States v. City of Detroit (6th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court correctly denied the Coalition's motion to intervene as of right
    • The Coalition is not entitled to permissive intervention

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 04/07/04
    Appeal dismissed 01/24/05
  • United States v. Macon County Board of Education (11th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Parent of former student has no right to appeal district court's approval of modification of a desegregation order
    • District court properly approved modification

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 12/13/01
    Dismissed for lack of standing 02/12/02
  • United States v. Law School Admissions Council (3d Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Unsuccessful law school applicant properly denied intervention into case brought by United States to enforce ADA in admissions testing
    • Unsuccessful law school applicant properly denied intervention may not appeal from judgment in underlying case

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee 1st Appeal [PDF] 11/02/01
    Brief as Appellee 2d Appeal [PDF] 06/24/01
    Court of Appeals Decision, unreported, 48 Fed. Appx. 41 08/27/02
  • United States v. City of Los Angeles (9th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Community groups and private individuals are not entitled to intervene in a case in order to enforce the consent decree entered between the United States and the City of Los Angeles resolving allegations of systemic police misconduct

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF] 07/27/01
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 288 F.3d 391 04/22/02
  • United States v. City of Los Angeles (9th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Court of Appeals should deny the police union's motion for a stay pending its appeal of the district court's denial of its motion to intervene in the case between the United States and the City of Los Angeles regarding the operations of the Los Angeles Police Department
    • Police union was not entitled to intervene in case to challenge consent decree between the United States and City of Los Angeles to resolve allegations of systemic police misconduct when the consent decree imposed no obligations upon the union or its members and did not affect officers' collective bargaining rights

     
    Document Date 
    Opposition to Stay [HTML] [PDF] 03/22/01
    Court of Appeals denial of stay, unpublished  04/16/01
    Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF] 06/04/01
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 288 F.3d 391 04/22/02
  • Davis and United States v. City of Baker School Board (5th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Newly-formed school district formerly part of district under desegregation order remains subject to the orders affecting the school system until it has met its burden of showing that its separation will not adversely affect desegregation

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appelle [HTML]  [PDF] 07/31/00
    Court of Appeals decision, unpublished 03/08/01


Browse Briefs by Category

Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Criminal
Education
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex, and Religion)
Equal Access to Justice Act
Equal Credit Opportunity Act
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Housing
Immigration
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Institutionalized Persons
Police Misconduct (Civil Cases)
Religion Cases
Servicemember Cases
Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Voting
Other
General Information Appellate Section
 
Leadership
Diana K. Flynn
Chief
Contact
Appellate Section
(202) 514-2195
FAX - (202) 514-8490
Email:
General Appellate Contact:
crt.appellate@usdoj.gov

Amicus curiae suggestions may be submitted to crt.amicus@usdoj.gov. Submissions should include case name, docket number, circuit/district court name, a brief description of the case and issue, and the current status if known.

Stay Connected YouTube MySpace Twitter Facebook Sign Up for E-Mail Updates Subscribe to News Feeds