You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Gratz v. Bollinger

Citations: 309 F.3d 329; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 30133; 2001 WL 34038399Docket: 01-1333, 01-1416, 01-1418, 01-1438, 01-1447, 01-1516

Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; November 16, 2001; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued an order regarding consolidated appeals involving various parties, including plaintiffs and university defendants, with intervening minority students. The primary legal issue addressed was the motion to terminate the stay on a district court's previously issued injunction, which was denied after a majority vote by the active judges. This demonstrates the appellate court's authority in managing the enforcement of lower court orders during the appeal process. Additionally, the court set a structured schedule for oral arguments, specifying the time allocation for each party across the consolidated cases. The cases included Gratz et al. v. Bollinger et al. and Grutter v. Bollinger et al., with oral arguments scheduled for December 6, 2001. This order underscores the court's procedural oversight in ensuring orderly and efficient appellate proceedings. The outcome maintained the status quo of the stay, pending further arguments and judicial review.

Legal Issues Addressed

Scheduling of Oral Arguments

Application: The court established a specific schedule for oral arguments, allocating time among the parties and detailing the order of cases, demonstrating the court's control over proceeding logistics.

Reasoning: The court approved a schedule for oral arguments for the consolidated cases:... Oral arguments are scheduled for December 6, 2001, at 1:30 P.M. in Room 403 of the Potter Stewart United States Courthouse in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Stay of Injunction

Application: The appellate court denied the motion to terminate the stay on the district court's injunction, emphasizing the discretionary power of appellate courts in managing injunctions.

Reasoning: A motion by Plaintiff-Appellee Grutter to terminate a stay on the district court's injunction was denied after a majority of active judges voted against it.