Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

1416-CV15024

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, AT KANSAS CITY SIXTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

Kyle Lawson and Evan Dahlgren, and
Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Robert Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds,
Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) Cause No. 1416-CV_____ ) ) Division ____ ) ) ) ) )

PETITION FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiffs in this action are same-sex couples who seek the freedom to marry in

Missouri and have been denied marriage licenses by the Jackson County Recorder of Deeds.

They bring this action to challenge the validity, under the United States Constitution, of

Missouri’s laws that bar marriage between two people of the same sex: Missouri Revised

Statutes section 451.022; Article I, Section 33 of the Missouri Constitution; and any other

statutory or common law preventing same-sex couples from marrying subject to the same terms

and conditions as different-sex couples. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief for

violations of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution (U.S. Const.

amend. XIV, § 1).

2. Marriage is universally recognized and celebrated as the hallmark of a couple’s

love for and commitment to each other. When two people marry, they commit personally and

publicly to build a life together, and they ask their families, friends, communities, and

government to respect, honor, and support that commitment. Marriage has long been recognized

1 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 1 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

and valued for its beneficial contribution to the welfare of society and to individual happiness. Lesbians and gay men in Missouri are denied the freedom afforded to different-sex couples in this State to have their loving, committed relationships recognized through marriage.
3. Missouri maintains a ban on marriage for same-sex couples. Barring same-sex couples from marrying not only denies loving, committed, same-sex couples the dignity and status that only marriage can confer on their relationships and their families, but it also prohibits the extension to same-sex couples of the same legal protections, duties, and benefits that married couples are allowed by law. Missouri law deprives same-sex couples of these rights and freedoms for no other reasons than their sexual orientation and their sex.
4. Defendant’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to plaintiffs excludes them from the many legal protections available to spouses. For example, when one spouse dies, the surviving spouse may face serious financial hardship, including the loss of his or her home, because, without marriage, same-sex couples in Missouri are not allowed to title their joint property in the same way that different-sex married couples can. Because of the refusal to allow plaintiffs to marry, they are also denied many federal protections afforded to married couples, such as the ability to take time off work to care for a sick spouse under the Family Medical Leave Act and access to a spouse’s social security retirement benefits.
5. The refusal to allow plaintiffs to marry undermines their ability to achieve their life goals and dreams, threatens their mutual economic stability, and denies them “a dignity and status of immense import.” United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2692 (2013). Moreover, they and their children are stigmatized and relegated to a second-class status by being barred from marriage. The exclusion tells same-sex couples, and all the world, that their relationships are unworthy of recognition. Id. at 2694. And it “humiliates . . . children now being raised by
2 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 2 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

same-sex couples” and “makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.” Id.
6. Our courts and our society have discarded, one by one, marriage laws that violated the Constitution’s mandate of equality, such as anti-miscegenation laws and laws that denied married women legal independence and the right to make decisions for themselves. History has taught us that the vitality of marriage does not depend on maintaining such discriminatory laws. To the contrary, eliminating these unconstitutional restraints on the freedom to marry has enhanced the institution.
7. The exclusion of same-sex couples from the protections and responsibilities of marriage violates the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This discriminatory treatment is subject to heightened scrutiny because it burdens the fundamental right to marry and because it discriminates based on sex and sexual orientation. But it cannot stand under any level of scrutiny because defendant’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples does not rationally further any legitimate government interest. It serves only to disparage and injure same-sex couples and their families.
8. Plaintiffs bring this suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for declaratory and injunctive relief against defendant. Specifically, plaintiffs seek: (a) a declaration that defendant’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to plaintiffs and Missouri’s failure and recognize marriages of same-sex couples violates the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; and (b) a permanent injunction directing defendant to issue a marriage license to plaintiffs and other same-sex couples who are
3 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 3 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

eligible for a marriage license except for the fact that they wish to marry someone of the same sex.
THE PARTIES Plaintiffs
9. All plaintiffs are residents of Missouri. 10. Kyle Lawson is a math teacher; Evan Dahlgren gives private voice lessons and is a music teacher. 11. When Kyle and Evan met, they discovered that they have many shared interests, including teaching, sports, music, humor, and family values. Evan knew he wanted to marry Kyle after spending Christmas Eve with Kyle’s family. He felt like he belonged in the family and was particularly heartened by their warm reception and invitation to attend church services with the family. Kyle understood he wanted to spend his life with Evan when he saw Evan interact with others and realized that Evan makes him smile more than anyone else ever has. They celebrated their anniversary by going on a cruise in May 2014. Alone under the stars on the top deck, Evan felt Kyle place a small box in his hand. He opened it to find a ring. Kyle proposed, and Evan accepted. 12. Marriage is important to Kyle and Evan because they want to spend their lives together as spouses. They each have always dreamt of marriage and, now that they have found the right person, are eager to marry. They understand marriage tells society that a couple loves each other and is committed to each other. They also would like to undertake the responsibilities of marriage under the law as well as experience the benefits and privileges of marriage. 13. It is important to Kyle and Evan that they be married in Kansas City. Kansas City is their home, where they met, and where they plan to live. Also, because so many of their loving
4 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 4 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

and supportive family members and friends are in Kansas City, it makes sense to them to marry at a place where as many can participate as possible.
14. Kyle and Evan are excited to live together as an engaged couple and had hoped that they would have the right to marry in Missouri before they moved in together. On June 19, 2014, they went to the office of the Jackson County Recorder of Deeds in Kansas City to obtain a marriage license. Although otherwise eligible to obtain a license, they were refused one because they are both men and therefore barred from marrying in Missouri under Missouri Revised Statutes section 451.022 and Article I, Section 33 of the Missouri Constitution.
15. Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty are both professionals in the private financial sector.
16. Angela and Shannon recently celebrated their eleventh anniversary as a couple. When they first committed to one another, they did not discuss marriage because they did not think it would be available for same-sex couples anytime soon. Nonetheless, they privately exchanged rings as a personal symbol of their commitment to one another and have always considered themselves to be a married couple. Still, they want to be legally married, like their parents and friends. Angela and Shannon believe marriage is an integral part of our culture, and they want their children to understand that their relationship is important, recognized, and respected. They also want to give one another the security that comes with marriage. Finally, marriage will allow them to publicly acknowledge their commitment to each other and their family in a way for which there is no comparable substitute.
17. Angela and Shannon became engaged in November 2013. Since becoming engaged, they have noticed that their children seem to have a better idea of their commitment to each other. And, although they want to be married as soon as possible, they also want to be
5 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 5 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

married in Missouri. It is important to them that they be married in Missouri so that their children, other family members, and friends can all fully participate in and celebrate their wedding. In addition, being forced to leave their state to marry and secure the obligations, benefits, and privileges of marriage is discriminatory and makes them feel like second-class Missourians. On June 20, 2014, Angela and Shannon went to the office of the Jackson County Recorder of Deeds in Kansas City to obtain a marriage license. Although otherwise eligible to obtain a license, they were refused one because they are both women and, as a same-sex couple, they are barred from marrying in Missouri under Missouri Revised Statutes section 451.022 and Article I, Section 33 of the Missouri Constitution. Defendant
18. Defendant Robert Kelly is sued solely in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of the Recorder of Deeds. As Director, Kelly is responsible for the issuance of marriage licenses in Jackson County, Missouri.
19. In Missouri, the solemnization of a marriage in which the parties have not obtained a marriage license is a misdemeanor. § 451.120 RSMo. In addition, marriages solemnized without a license are not recognized as valid. § 451.040.1 RSMo.
20. Kelly and his employees and agents are the only persons who can issue a marriage license in Jackson County, Missouri.
21. In performing his duties as Director, and in all acts or omissions described in this petition, defendant Kelly acts under color of state law.
Missouri’s Refusal to Allow Same-Sex Couples to Marry 22. In Missouri, marriage is governed by Chapter 451 of the Revised Statutes, captioned “Marriage, Marriage Contracts, and Rights of Married Women.” In 1996, Chapter 451 was revised to prohibit marriage for same-sex couples. The revision provided that “[a]ny
6 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 6 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

purported marriage not between a man and a woman is invalid [and n]o recorder shall issue a marriage license, except to a man and a woman.” § 451.022 RSMo.
23. At the 2004 primary election, the Missouri Constitution was amended to include a provision, “[t]hat to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.” Mo. Const. art. I, § 33
24. As a result, marriage in Missouri is legally available only to different-sex couples. Same-sex couples are not permitted to marry in Missouri, and if they are married elsewhere, their marriages are not recognized in Missouri.
25. Missouri law would allow the plaintiffs to marry and have their marriage recognized here but for the fact that they are same-sex couples. They are not related to one another by blood or marriage. They are not married to anyone else and are over the age of eighteen. They have the capacity to consent to marry.
Same-Sex and Different-Sex Couples Are Similarly Situated for Purposes of Marriage 26. The Supreme Court has called marriage “the most important relation in life,”
Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978) (internal quotation marks omitted), and an “expression[] of emotional support and public commitment,” Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987). It is “a far-reaching legal acknowledgement of the intimate relationship between two people . . . .” Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2692. This is as true for same-sex couples as it is for different-sex couples.
27. Couples such as the plaintiffs are similarly situated to different-sex couples in all of the characteristics relevant to the issuance of a civil marriage license.
28. By applying for a marriage license, the plaintiffs sought to make the same commitment to one another as different-sex couples who enter into a marriage. Like married
7 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 7 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

different-sex couples, married same-sex couples build their lives together, plan their futures together, and hope to grow old together. Like married different-sex couples, married samesex couples support one another emotionally and financially and take care of one another physically when faced with injury or illness.
29. Plaintiffs are just as willing and able as married different-sex couples to assume the obligations of marriage.
30. Plaintiffs would benefit no less than different-sex couples from the many legal protections and the social recognition afforded to married couples.
31. There was a time when an individual’s sex was relevant to his or her legal rights and duties within the marital relationship. For example, husbands had a duty to support their wives but not vice versa, and husbands also had legal ownership of all property belonging to their wives. But these legal distinctions have all been removed such that the legal rights and duties of husbands and wives are now identical.
Refusing to Allow Plaintiffs to Marry Causes Them Substantial Harm 32. Defendant’s refusal to issue a marriage license to the plaintiffs and Missouri’s ban on marriages between individuals of the same sex deprive the plaintiffs of numerous legal protections that are available to different-sex couples in Missouri by virtue of their marriages. 33. Missouri law requires a decedent’s marital status and surviving spouse’s name to appear on a death certificate. Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 19, § 10-10.050. Upon their deaths, the plaintiffs want both their own and their spouse’s death certificates, issued and maintained by the State of Missouri, to reflect that they are married, but § 451.022 RSMo and Mo. Const. art. I, § 33 prohibit and will continue to prohibit them from marrying and having their marriage recognized absent relief from this Court. Unless enforcement of § 451.022 RSMo and Mo.
8 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 8 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

Const. art. I, § 33 is enjoined, when each of the plaintiffs die, his or her death certificate will fail to list a spouse.
34. Indeed, because § 451.022 RSMo and Mo. Const. art. I, § 33 prohibit and will continue to prohibit the plaintiffs from marrying or having their marriages recognizes, the state registrar of vital records is prohibited from issuing a copy of a death certificate to the surviving same-sex plaintiff because that person would not be considered a spouse. See Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 19, § 10-10.090.
35. Missouri law provides a “right of sepulcher” that allows an individual “the right to choose and control the burial, cremation, or other final disposition of a dead human body.” § 194.119 RSMo. The statute assigns the right of sepulcher to a hierarchical list of persons. “The surviving spouse” appears third on the list, preceded only by “[a]n attorney in fact designated in a durable power of attorney wherein the deceased specifically granted the right of sepulcher over his or her body to such attorney in fact” and in cases where the decedent “was on active duty in the United States military at the time of death[.]” Id. Upon one of their deaths, the plaintiffs want the other to choose and control the burial, cremation, or other final disposition of his or her body. Absent a valid power of attorney, § 451.022 RSMo and Mo. Const. art. I, § 33’s prohibition on the entry into and recognition of a marriage by the plaintiffs will give the right of sepulcher to the decedent’s surviving adult child, surviving minor child’s guardian, surviving parent, surviving sibling, or “[t]he next nearest surviving relative of the deceased by consanguinity or affinity” in precedence to any right claimed by the individual he or she wishes to marry. § 194.119 RSMo.
9 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 9 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

36. There are many other ways in which the refusal to allow same-sex couples to marry and to recognize their marriages causes the plaintiffs and others like them to be treated unequally. By way of example only:
a. A married person is entitled to private visits with his or her spouse in a nursing home, and, if both are residents at the same facility, spouses are permitted to share a room. § 198.088 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they are not permitted to share a room.
b. A different-sex spouse may give consent for an experimental treatment, test, or drug on behalf of his or her spouse who is incapable of giving informed consent. § 431.064 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they may not.
c. Different-sex spouses are not required to testify against their spouse in a criminal trial. § 546.260 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they could be compelled to testify against one another.
d. Different-sex spouses have priority to bring an action for wrongful death if their spouse is killed. § 537.080 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they cannot bring a wrongful death action if one of them is killed.
e. Different-sex spouses may file a claim for compensation on behalf of an incapacitated or disabled spouse. § 537.684 RSMo. Because the
10 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 10 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they cannot. f. Different-sex spouses may petition for maintenance when they are abandoned without good cause and without maintenance. § 452.130 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they cannot. g. A different-sex spouse whose husband or wife is the victim of a drunk driver may apply for the installation of a drunk-driving victim memorial sign. § 227.295 RSMo; Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 7, § 10-27.010. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they cannot. h. Surviving different-sex spouses are entitled to remainder of workers’ compensation payments for permanent total disability of their decedent spouse. § 287.200.4(5) RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they are not. i. Surviving different-sex spouses are entitled to continued coverage under their spouse’s health, dental, vision, or prescription-drug insurance plans. § 376.892 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they are not. j. The surviving different-sex spouse of a public employee with five or more years of service who dies before retirement would receive a survivorship benefit. § 104.140 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they would not.
11 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 11 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

k. A surviving different-sex spouse of an individual killed in an automobile accident may obtain a copy of the coroner’s report. § 58.449 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they would be required to seek a subpoena. Id.
l. A bank deposit made by different-sex spouses will be considered held in a tenancy by the entirety. § 362.470 RSMo. Because the plaintiffs cannot marry in Missouri and have their marriage recognized, they cannot hold an account as tenants by the entirety.
37. By refusing to allow the plaintiffs to enter into a legal marriage, the defendant excludes the plaintiffs and other similarly situated couples from the foregoing— and many other— protections provided to married couples under Missouri law.
38. Refusing to allow the plaintiffs to marry and refusal to recognize the legal marriages of same-sex couples also denies them eligibility for numerous federal protections afforded to married couples. “[C]ountless government benefits are tied to marriage, as are many responsibilities[.]” Wolf v. Walker, 14-CV-64-BBC, 2014 WL 2558444, at *1, *2 (W.D. Wis. June 6, 2014).
39. Some of the federal protections for married couples are available only to couples if their marriages are legally recognized in the state in which they live. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 416(h)(1)(A)(i) (marriage for eligibility for social security benefits based on law of state where couple resides at time of application); 29 C.F.R. § 825.122(b) (same for Family Medical Leave Act). Thus, even if plaintiffs were to leave Missouri to be married in one of the neighboring states that would issue marriage licenses and allow them to marry, they could not access such
12 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 12 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

federal protections as long as they live in Missouri and Missouri refuses to recognize their marriage.
40. Refusing to allow the plaintiffs to marry denies them of stabilizing effects of marriage, which helps keep couples together during times of crisis or conflict.
41. Refusing to allow the plaintiffs to marry harms them, their children, and their existing and future children by denying them the social recognition that comes with marriage. Marriage has profound social significance both for the couple that gets married and the family, friends, and community that surround them. The terms “married” and “spouse” have understood meanings that command respect for a couple’s relationship and the commitment they have made.
42. Refusing to recognize the legal marriages of same-sex couples also demeans and stigmatizes lesbian and gay couples and their children by sending the message that they are less worthy and valued than families headed by different-sex couples.
43. The plaintiffs understand that being married in Missouri entails both benefits to and obligations on the spouses, and they welcome both.
None of the Potential Justifications for Missouri’s Refusing to Allow Same-Sex Couples to Marry Can Withstand Heightened Scrutiny or Even Rational-Basis Review
44. Because Missouri’s ban on marriages of same-sex couples infringes on their fundamental rights and is a classification based on sex and sexual orientation, Missouri’s marriage ban can withstand constitutional review only if they survive heightened scrutiny. But even if heightened scrutiny did not apply, the potential justifications for Missouri’s marriage bans are not rationally related to a legitimate government interest.
13 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 13 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

Moral Opposition to Marriage for Same-Sex Couples and Support of the Traditional Family
45. Neither tradition nor moral disapproval of same-sex relationships or marriage for lesbian and gay couples is a legitimate basis for unequal treatment of same-sex couples under the law. The fact that a discriminatory law is long-standing does not immunize it from constitutional scrutiny. And the Supreme Court of the United States has made clear that the law cannot, directly or indirectly, give effect to private biases and has expressly rejected moral disapproval of marriage for same-sex couples as a legitimate basis for discriminatory treatment of lesbian and gay couples. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2693 (holding an “interest in protecting [] traditional moral teachings reflected in heterosexual-only marriage laws” was not a legitimate justification for federal Defense of Marriage Act).
Preserving the Public Fisc and the Coffers of Private Business 46. Missouri cannot justify its marriage bans by claiming an interest in preserving the public fisc or the coffers of private business. Saving money is not a justification for excluding a group from a government benefit without an independent rationale for why the cost savings ought to be borne by the particular group denied the benefit. Moreover, the notion that allowing same-sex couples to marry will burden the State financially or constitute a burden on businesses lacks any factual basis and defies common sense.
Protection of Children 47. Missouri’s refusal to allow the plaintiffs to marry is not rationally related to child welfare concerns. The government has a vital interest in protecting the well-being of children, but the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage bears no relation to this interest. To the contrary, it harms children in the State.
14 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 14 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

48. Moreover, there is no valid basis to assert a preference for childrearing by different-sex couples over same-sex couples. There is a consensus within the scientific community, based on over thirty years of research, that children raised by same-sex couples are just as well adjusted as children raised by different-sex couples. This is recognized by every major professional organization dedicated to children’s health and welfare, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the National Association of Social Workers, and the Child Welfare League of America.
49. Other courts have found, after trials involving expert testimony, that there is no rational basis for favoring parenting by heterosexual couples over gay and lesbian couples. See, e.g., DeBoer v. Snyder, 973 F. Supp. 2d 757, 772 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 21, 2014) (“There is … no logical connection between banning same-sex marriage and providing children with an ‘optimal environment’ or achieving ‘optimal outcomes.’”); Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921, 980 (N.D. Cal. 2010) (finding that the research supporting the conclusion that “[c]hildren raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted” is “accepted beyond serious debate in the field of developmental psychology”), aff’d sub nom. Perry v. Brown, 671 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2012), vacated for lack of standing sub nom Hollingsworth v. Perry, 133 S. Ct. 2652 (2013); In re Adoption of Doe, 2008 WL 5006172, at *1, *20 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Nov. 25, 2008) (“[B]ased on the robust nature of the evidence available in the field, this Court is satisfied that the issue is so far beyond dispute that it would be irrational to hold otherwise; the best interests of children are not preserved by prohibiting homosexual adoption.”), aff’d sub nom Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families v. Adoption of X.X.G., 45 So.3d 79 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010); Howard v. Child
15 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 15 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

Welfare Agency Review Bd., Nos. 1999-9881, 2004 WL 3154530, at *1, *9 and 2004 WL 3200916, at *1, *3-4 (Ark. Cir. Ct. Dec. 29, 2004) (holding based on factual findings regarding the well-being of children of gay parents that “there was no rational relationship between the [exclusion of gay people from becoming foster parents] and the health, safety, and welfare of the foster children.”), aff’d sub nom Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Howard, 238 S.W.3d 1 (Ark. 2006).
50. Refusing to allow same-sex couples to marry has no conceivable benefit to children of heterosexual couples. It does not encourage different-sex couples who have children to marry or stay married for the benefit of their children. And, regardless of whether the marriages of same-sex couples are allowed or recognized, the children of different-sex spouses will continue to enjoy the same benefits and protections that flow from their parents’ marriage.
51. Refusing to allow same-sex couples to marry harms the children raised by lesbian and gay couples by denying their families significant benefits and by branding their families as inferior and less deserving of respect and, thus, encouraging private bias and discrimination. According to data from the 2010 United States Census, there are over 1,900 same-sex couples raising children in Missouri. The State’s interest in the welfare of children of lesbian and gay parents is, or should be, as great as its interest in the welfare of other children.
16 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 16 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT I
Deprivation of the Fundamental Right to Marry in Violation of the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
52. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all of the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
53. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution precludes any State from “depriv[ing] any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1. Governmental interference with a fundamental right may be sustained only upon a showing that the legislation is closely tailored to serve an important governmental interest.
54. The Supreme Court has long recognized that marriage is a fundamental right and that choices about marriage, like choices about other aspects of family life, are a central part of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
55. Courts in Missouri have recognized marriage as a fundamental right. See Glass v. Trowbridge, No. 14-CV-3059-S-DGK, 2014 WL 1878820, at *1, * 3 (W.D. Mo. May 12, 2014) (recognizing “fundamental right to marry”); Amos v. Higgins, —F. Supp. 2d—, No. 14-004011CV-C-GAF, 2014 WL 572316, at *1, *2 (W.D. Mo. Feb. 6, 2014); Nichols v. Moyers, 4:13CV735 CDP, 2013 WL 2418218, at *1 (E.D. Mo. June 3, 2013); Fuller v. Norman, 936 F. Supp. 2d 1096, 1097 (W.D. Mo. 2013); Komosa v. Komosa, 939 S.W.2d 479, 483 (Mo. App. E.D. 1997).
17 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 17 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

56. Missouri law denies the plaintiffs and other same-sex couples this fundamental right by refusing to issue them a marriage license or to recognize marriages between persons of the same sex.
57. There is no important interest to justify denying the plaintiffs this fundamental right. Indeed, the denial is not tailored to any legitimate interest at all.
58. Missouri’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or to recognize marriages entered into by same-sex couples violates the Due Process Clause.
59. Defendant, acting under color of state law, is depriving plaintiffs of rights secured by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
COUNT II Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation in Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
60. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all of the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
61. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “no State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1.
62. By denying the plaintiffs and other lesbian and gay couples the ability to enter into a marriage in Missouri, defendant disadvantages lesbian and gay people on the basis of their sexual orientation. Denial of a marriage license in turn denies couples significant legal protections. And, it “degrade[s] [and] demean[s]” them by “instruct[ing] . . . all persons with
18 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 18 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children,” that their relationship is “less worthy” than the relationships of others. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2696.
63. Same-sex couples seeking marriage licenses in Missouri and different-sex married couples seeking marriage licenses in Missouri are similarly situated for purposes of marriage, except for the fact that different-sex couples will be issued marriage licenses and have their marriages recognized.
64. Classifications based on sexual orientation demand heightened scrutiny. 65. Lesbians and gay men are members of a discrete and insular minority that has suffered a history of discrimination in Missouri and across the United States. 66. Sexual orientation bears no relation to an individual’s ability to perform or contribute to society. 67. Sexual orientation is a core, defining trait that is so fundamental to one’s identity that a person may not legitimately be required to abandon it (even if that were possible) as a condition of equal treatment. Sexual orientation is generally fixed at an early age and highly resistant to change through intervention. Efforts to change a person’s sexual orientation through interventions by medical professionals have not been shown to be effective. No mainstream mental health professional organization approves interventions that attempt to change sexual orientation, and many—including the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association— have adopted policy statements cautioning professionals and the public about these treatments. 68. Prejudice against lesbians and gay men continues to seriously curtail the operation of the political process, preventing this group from obtaining redress through legislative means. Lesbians and gay men lack statutory protection against discrimination in employment, public
19 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 19 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

accommodations, and housing at the federal level and in more than half of the states, including Missouri. Lesbians and gay men have far fewer civil rights protections at the state and federal level than women and racial minorities had when sex and race classifications were declared to be suspect or quasi-suspect. Lesbians and gay men have been stripped of the right to marry through thirty state constitutional amendments, and have been targeted through the voter initiative process more than any other group.
69. For all of these reasons, classification based on sexual orientation should be reviewed under heightened scrutiny, but the classification challenged here cannot survive under any level of constitutional scrutiny. The refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples is not rationally related to any legitimate governmental interest. All it does is disparage and injure lesbian and gay couples who want to marry and their children.
70. Defendant, acting under color of state law, is depriving plaintiffs of rights secured by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
COUNT III Discrimination on the Basis of Sex in Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
(42 U.S.C. § 1983) 71. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all of the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 72. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “no State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1.
20 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 20 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

73. Missouri’s codified public policy is “to recognize marriage only between a man and a woman.” § 451.022 RSMo. In addition, the statute states that “[n]o recorder shall issue a marriage license, except to a man and a woman[,]” and “[a] marriage between persons of the same sex will not be recognized for any purpose in this state even when valid where contracted.” Id.
74. By refusing marriage licenses to couples that are not of different sexes, defendant discriminates on the basis of sex. Plaintiffs were refused a marriage license because they seek to marry someone of the same sex; if they sought to marry someone of a different sex, then they would have been issued a license. The only reason they cannot obtain a marriage license is the sex of the person they want to marry.
75. The Supreme Court of the United States has made clear that perpetuation of traditional gender roles is not a legitimate government interest.
76. Given that there are no longer legal distinctions between the duties of husbands and wives, there is no basis for the sex-based eligibility requirements for marriage.
77. The defendant can demonstrate no exceedingly persuasive justification for this discrimination based on sex.
78. State law prohibiting the issuance of marriage licenses by recorders and the recognition of marriage for same-sex couples thus violates the Equal Protection Clause.
79. Defendant, acting under color of state law, is depriving plaintiffs of rights secured by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:
21 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 21 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

1. Enter a declaratory judgment that § 451.022 RSMo; Mo. Const. art. I, § 33; and any other provision of Missouri statutory or common law barring same-sex couples from marrying violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution;
2. Enter a declaratory judgment that § 451.022 RSMo; Mo. Const. art. I, § 33; and any other provision of Missouri statutory or common law barring same-sex couples from marrying violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution;
3. Enter an injunction directing defendant to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples upon completion of an application for a marriage license and receipt of all fees and other documents required for the issuance of a marriage license under the laws of the State of Missouri.
4. Award costs of suit, including reasonable attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and
5. Enter all further relief to which plaintiffs may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Anthony E. Rothert Anthony E. Rothert, #44827 Grant R. Doty, #60788 American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation 454 Whittier Street St. Louis, Missouri 63108 (314) 652-3114 (314) 652-3112 (facsimile) arothert@aclu-mo.org gdoty@aclu-mo.org
22 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 22 of 23

Electronically Filed - Jackson - Kansas City - June 24, 2014 - 05:09 PM

Gillian R. Wilcox, #61278 American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation 3601 Main Street Kansas City, Missouri 64111 (816) 470-9938 gwilcox@aclu-mo.org ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
23 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 1-1 Filed 07/15/14 Page 23 of 23

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

KYLE LAWSON, et al.,

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

vs.

)

)

ROBERT T. KELLY, in his official

)

Capacity as Director of the Jackson )

County Department of Recorder of

)

Deeds,

)

)

Defendant.

)

_____________________________ )

)

STATE OF MISSOURI,

)

)

Intervenor.

)

Case No. 14-0622-CV-W-ODS

ORDER AND OPINION (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS, (2) GRANTING
IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (3) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION, AND (4) STAYING EFFECT OF
JUDGMENT PENDING COMPLETION OF APPEALS

Plaintiffs seek to vindicate their fundamental right to marry, irrespective of the gender of the person they wish to wed. They have sued Robert Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds, seeking to enjoin enforcement of state law – including provisions of the Missouri Constitution and the Revised Missouri Statutes – that would preclude Defendant from issuing the marriage license they seek.
The State of Missouri (“the State”) intervened as of right pursuant to section 527.110 of the Revised Missouri Statutes in order to defend the constitutionality of these provisions. The State then removed the case to federal court and Kelly has

taken no action other than to consent to the removal.1 Now pending are three motions, all of which are ready for ruling:
1. The State’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, 2. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, and 3. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Permanent Injunction.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Kyle Lawson and Even Dahlgren, both of whom are male, desire to be married. Plaintiffs Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty, both of who are female, desire to be married. Both couples comply with all marriage requirements imposed by Missouri law save one: they seek to marry a person of the same gender. In June 2014, Lawson and Dahlgren went to the Jackson County Recorder of Deeds to obtain a marriage license; their application was rejected. Separately (but also in June 2014), Curtis and McGinty went to the Jackson County Recorder of Deeds to obtain a marriage license; their application was also rejected.
In 1996, the Missouri General Assembly passed (and the Missouri Governor signed) a law declaring that “[i]t is the public policy of this state to recognize marriage only between a man and a woman” and further directing that no Recorder of Deeds “shall issue a marriage license, except to a man and a woman.” Mo. Rev. Stat. § 451.022. In August 2004, the citizens of Missouri approved an Amendment to the Missouri Constitution declaring “[t]hat to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.” Mo. Const. Art. I, § 33.
These statutory and constitutional provisions provide the basis for Kelly’s refusal to issue Plaintiffs the marriage licenses they sought. Plaintiffs present three claims. Count I asserts these provisions deprive Plaintiffs of the fundamental right to
1Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Remand, then sought and obtained leave to withdraw that motion. The Motion to Remand did not challenge the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction; instead, it argued there was a defect in the removal process. There is no question the Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and defects in the removal process can be waived, e.g., Nolan v. Prime Tanning Co., 871 F.2d 76, 78 (8th Cir. 1989), so there is no reason for the Court to delve into the matter further.
2

marry in violation of the Due Process Clause. Count II alleges these provisions discriminate based on sexual orientation in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Count III alleges these provisions discriminate based on gender in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
II. DISCUSSION
A. Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
The Court first considers the State’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The State contends the Supreme Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals have both ruled that provisions limiting marriage to members of opposite genders are constitutional. This Court is bound by decisions of the Supreme Court and the Eighth Circuit, so if the State is correct the Court would be obligated to rule in the State’s favor. However, the Court disagrees with the State’s interpretation of precedent.
1. The Supreme Court’s Precedent
(a). United States v. Windsor
The State finds support in two prior Supreme Court decisions. The first is United States v. Windsor – which, interestingly, Plaintiffs also cite as support. The Court disagrees with both sides and concludes Windsor does not aid either of them. The Court will discuss Windsor once now and explain why it is inapplicable to the issues at hand to avoid the need to discuss the matter twice.
The State is correct when it describes Windsor as discussing the states’ historic role in regulating marriage. 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2689-91 (2013). However, the Supreme Court did so only to demonstrate the curiosity of the federal government’s endeavor to regulate the matter through passage of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”). As the majority explained, “[i]n order to assess the validity of [DOMA’s]
3

intervention, it is necessary to discuss the extent of the state power and authority
over marriage as a matter of history and tradition.” Id. at 2691. Given this historical
state prerogative and responsibility, the Court found DOMA’s “unusual” attempt to
draw distinctions between various types of valid marriages violated the Fifth Amendment. Id. at 2681, 2693.2
Critically for present purposes, Windsor did not purport to establish what kinds
of marriages states are obligated to regard as proper; it simply accepted the
existence of a marriage deemed lawful by the State of New York and held the
federal government could not deem that marriage a nullity. The following passages
from the Windsor majority’s penultimate paragraph make the point:
The class to which DOMA directs its restrictions and restraints are those persons who are joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State. DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled to recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty. It imposes a disability on the class by refusing to acknowledge a status the State finds to be dignified and proper. . . . The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
133 S. Ct. at 2695-96 (emphasis supplied). The very next sentence cautions against
interpreting the opinion as imposing requirements on the states when it declares
“[t]his opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages.” Id. at 2696.
The State is wrong when it contends Windsor holds that state statutes
forbidding same-sex marriage are constitutional. Plaintiffs are wrong when they
contend Windsor holds states are constitutionally required to allow same-sex
marriages. Thus, both parties are incorrect when they contend Windsor dictates a
favorable outcome for their positions.
2One might think Windsor was a case about federalism. However, the majority said “it is unnecessary to decide whether this federal intrusion on state power is a violation of the Constitution because it disrupts the federal balance,” 133 S. Ct. at 2690, and couched the violation in terms of the Fifth Amendment. Therefore, according to the majority, Windsor is not a case about federalism.
4

(b). Baker v. Nelson
The second Supreme Court decision arises from Baker v. Nelson, a 1971 decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court. In Baker, the plaintiffs contended Minnesota’s statutes did not require couples wishing to marry be of opposite genders. Alternatively, they argued that if the statutes were interpreted to preclude same-sex marriage, the statutes violated the United States Constitution. The Minnesota Supreme Court first interpreted its statutes to require that marriage be between a man and a woman. The court then addressed the constitutional arguments and held that such an interpretation did not unconstitutionally deny the plaintiffs the fundamental right to marry, deprive the plaintiffs of liberty or property without due process, or violate the plaintiffs’ Equal Protection rights. 191 N.W.2d 185 (Minn. 1971).
At that time, Supreme Court review of constitutional challenges was different than it is today. Now, of course, the Supreme Court has discretion to grant certiorari to review such decisions. However, in 1971, 28 U.S.C. § 1257 permitted an appeal as of right to the Supreme Court from the final decision of a state court “where is drawn in question the validity of a statute of any state on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution . . . .” This does not mean the Supreme Court issued rulings in every such appeal; frequently, it disposed of the case summarily. This is what the Court did in Baker: in a one-sentence order, the Court ruled “[t]he appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.” Baker v. Nelson, 409 U.S. 810 (1972). The State argues the Supreme Court’s decision is a substantive and binding determination that there is no constitutional concern – much less an impingement of a constitutional right – when a state forbids same-sex marriage.
A summary disposition by the Supreme Court is a decision on the merits and has precedential value. E.g., Hicks v. Miranda, 422 U.S. 332, 344-45 (1975).3
3This is in contrast to the denial of certiorari. The Supreme Court’s decision to deny certiorari has no precedential value. E.g., Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 296 (1989) (citing United States v. Carver, 260 U.S. 482, 490 (1923)). Accordingly,
5

However, the precedential value is not as great as a full-fledged opinion because “a summary affirmance is an affirmance of the judgment only, [so] the rationale of the affirmance may not be gleaned solely from the opinion below.” Mandel v. Bradley, 432 U.S. 173, 176 (1977). All that is affirmed is the judgment, and not necessarily the reasoning employed by the lower court. Id. Thus, “summary affirmances obviously are of precedential value [but] [e]qually obviously, they are not of the same precedential value as would be an opinion of this Court treating the question on the merits.” Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 671 (1974). An outright reversal or explicit repudiation is not necessary to deprive a summary disposition of its precedential value.4 “[I]nferior federal courts had best adhere to the view that if the Court has branded a question as unsubstantial, it remains so except when doctrinal developments indicate otherwise.” Hicks, 422 U.S. at 344 (quotation omitted; emphasis supplied).
The Court concludes doctrinal developments indicate the Supreme Court’s summary ruling is not reliable or binding. Since its summary disposition in Baker, the Supreme Court has issued additional decisions discussing the right to marry. E.g., Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987); Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374 (1978). The Court has also issued decisions addressing laws that draw distinctions between homosexual and heterosexual conduct or homosexuals and heterosexuals as a class. E.g., Lawrence v. Texas, 123 S. Ct. 2472 (2003); Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996). As the Second Circuit observed in Windsor, “[w]hen Baker was decided in 1971, ‘intermediate scrutiny’ was not yet in the Court’s vernacular. Classifications based on illegitimacy and sex were not yet deemed quasi-suspect.” Windsor v. United States, 699 F.3d 169, 179 (2d Cir. 2012), aff’d, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2014).
the Court rejects Plaintiffs’ entreaties to divine some meaning from the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in several appellate decisions upholding the rights of homosexuals to marry.
4This rule may be a product of the large number of cases disposed of summarily, and the great difficulty involved in expecting the Supreme Court to list every summary disposition that might be impacted by a written opinion. Cf. Port Auth. Bondholders Protective Comm. v. Port of New York Auth., 387 F.2d 259, 262 n.3 (2d Cir. 1967) (cited with approval in Hicks).
6

Given that the Second Circuit concluded Baker was not binding, and that the Second
Circuit was later affirmed in in Windsor, “[t]he Supreme Court’s willingness to decide
Windsor without mentioning Baker speaks volumes regarding whether Baker remains good law.” Bostic v. Schaefer, 760 F.3d 352, 374 (4th Cir. 2014), cert.
denied, 2014 WL 3924685 (U.S. 2014). The undersigned joins those courts that
have similarly determined that doctrinal developments have superseded Baker and that Baker is not binding. E.g., Latta v. Otter, 2014 WL 4977682 at *3 (9th Cir. Oct. 7, 2014); Baskin v. Bogan, 766 F.3d 648, 659-60 (7th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 2014
WL 4425162 (U.S. 2014); Bostic, 760 F.3d at 374-75; Kitchen v. Herbert, 755 F.3d 1193, 1205-06 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 2014 WL 3841263 (U.S. 2014); but see Massachusetts v. United States Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 682 F.3d 1, 8 (1st
Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 2887 (2013) (“Baker does not resolve our own
case but it does limit the arguments to ones that do not presume or rest on a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”).5
5The plaintiffs in Baker were Richard Baker and the man he sought to marry, James McConnell. McConnell filed subsequent lawsuits in federal court; neither party mentions these suits or discusses their impact on this case, but the Court must do so because the appeals were decided by the Eighth Circuit. Shortly after Baker was decided, McConnell sought additional VA benefits on the theory that Baker was his dependent spouse. The effort failed, and in 1976 the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of relief. McConnell v. Nooner, 547 F.2d 54 (1976) (per curiam) (hereafter “McConnell I”). The Eighth Circuit noted that while Baker was pending Baker and McConnell had actually obtained a marriage license and participated in a wedding ceremony. The Court of Appeals relied on Baker to hold that the marriage was invalid under state law – an issue over which the Minnesota Supreme Court was the ultimate arbiter. The Court of Appeals also held “the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal for want of a substantial federal question constitutes an adjudication of the merits which is binding on the lower federal courts. . . . They, therefore, are collaterally estopped from relitigating these issues once more.” Id. at 56. This decision from 1976 does not mean that Baker is still binding for two reasons. First, it is not clear what constitutional issues were raised. Obviously, the Supreme Court’s decision could only be binding for the issues actually raised in Baker, and the Eighth Circuit’s decision could address Baker’s viability only for issues raised in McConnell I. Second, and more importantly McConnell I was decided before most of the aforementioned doctrinal developments occurred. Intermediate scrutiny for gender based classifications was applied for the first time a mere one day before McConnell I when the Supreme Court decided
7

2. The Eighth Circuit’s Precedent
The State also argues the Eighth Circuit conclusively rejected Plaintiff’s claims
in 2006 when it decided Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning. The Court
disagrees because the issue in Bruning did not involve the constitutionality of a
state’s prohibition of same-sex marriages.
Bruning involved an amendment to the Nebraska Constitution that declared that
only marriages between a man and woman would be recognized in that state and
that same-sex marriages would not be recognized. While this makes it appear that
Bruning involves the same issues as this case, this conclusion is false: the plaintiffs
in Bruning attacked the constitutional amendment by arguing that it deprived them of
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), and the rest of the developments in that area – and the other cases cited in the text – occurred thereafter.
Decades later, McConnell sought an income tax refund, contending he and Baker were lawfully married and thus entitled to file as a married couple. The district court denied McConnell’s claim and the Eighth Circuit affirmed in an unpublished opinion. The Court of Appeals again referenced Baker, observing that “[t]he United States Supreme Court upheld that decision on appeal by dismissing the appeal for want of a substantial federal question” and citing Hicks for the proposition that “dismissal of appeal for want of substantial federal question constitutes adjudication of merits which is binding on lower federal courts.” McConnell v. United States, 188 Fed. Appx. 540, 542 (8th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (unpublished) (hereafter “McConnell II”). However, the Eighth Circuit’s opinion does not describe any constitutional issues raised in the case. Neither does the district court’s opinion that formed the basis of the appeal. McConnell v. United States, 2005 WL 19458 (D. Minn. 2005). The Court has examined the Appellant’s Brief, and it similarly does not specify the nature of any constitutional attack on Minnesota’s prohibition on same-sex marriage. To the contrary: McConnell argued that he was not seeking a right to become married because he and Baker were already married: he theorized that because the couple had obtained a marriage license and participated in a ceremony, the subsequent “revocation” of that marriage constituted a violation of their Due Process rights. Appellant’s Brief at 25-26. This is the only time the Constitution is mentioned in connection with the issue of marriage. The Court concludes McConnell II does not require the Court to apply Baker for two reasons. First, McConnell II is an unpublished disposition, and unpublished opinions are binding in limited circumstances, none of which appear present in this situation. Second, the plaintiffs in McConnell II asserted a completely different claim and did not raise the constitutional issues raised in this case. Thus, to whatever extent McConnell II dictates that Baker is still binding, it cannot be understood as confirming Baker applies to the claims at issue here.
8

access to the political process. The Eighth Circuit characterized the plaintiffs’ claims as follows:
Appellees do not assert a right to marriage or same-sex unions. Rather, they seek a level playing field, an equal opportunity to convince the people's elected representatives that same-sex relationships deserve legal protection. The argument turns on the fact that § 29 is an amendment to the Nebraska Constitution. Unlike state-wide legislation restricting marriage to a man and a woman, a constitutional amendment deprives gays and lesbians of “equal footing in the political arena” because state and local government officials now lack the power to address issues of importance to this minority.
Bruning, 455 F.3d 859, 865 (8th Cir. 2006) (quotations omitted; emphasis supplied). The plaintiffs did not assert a right to same-sax marriage, so nothing in Bruning directly disposes of whether such a right exists.
In rejecting the plaintiffs’ challenges, the Eighth Circuit first observed that many constitutional provisions impair the ability to participate in the political process, but such impairments are not automatically unconstitutional. Id. at 865-66 & n.2. The plaintiffs in Bruning argued for a higher degree of scrutiny because homosexuals are a suspect classification, but the Eighth Circuit rejected this argument. Id. at 866-67. As the Eighth Circuit explained, “[i]f sexual orientation, like race, were a ‘suspect classification’ for purposes of the Equal Protection Clause, then [the plaintiffs’] focus on the political burden erected by a constitutional amendment would find support” in several Supreme Court cases. Id. at 866. The Eighth Circuit then applied rational basis review and upheld the amendment to the Nebraska Constitution. Id. at 86768.
Critically for present purposes, the Bruning plaintiffs did not argue the classification created by the amendment impaired a fundamental right – so the Eighth Circuit’s ruling cannot be construed as passing on this issue. Similarly, the Bruning plaintiffs did not argue the amendment drew distinctions based on gender – so once again, the Eighth Circuit’s ruling cannot be construed as passing on this issue. Indeed, Bruning makes no mention of these arguments – which is unsurprising, given that the plaintiffs were not even seeking to vindicate their right to
9

marry. Bruning does not control because it does not address the claims raised in this case.
However, there is one aspect of Bruning that relates to the issues in this case. As noted above, Bruning holds that sexual orientation is not a suspect class and that classifications based on sexual orientation are not subject to heightened review of any kind. This directly impacts Count II, and requires the Court to uphold section 451.022 and Article I, section 33 if they are rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest, keeping in mind that such provisions enjoy a strong presumption of validity. In applying this standard, the Bruning court clearly expressed its belief that laws prohibiting same-sex marriage would pass rational basis review. 455 F.3d at 867-68. On this basis, the Court grants the State judgment on the pleadings with respect to Count II.
But to reiterate – Bruning did not consider whether laws prohibiting same-sex marriage would pass intermediate or strict scrutiny. More importantly, Bruning did not consider – because it was not asked to consider – whether there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, either because laws forbidding it burden a fundamental right or draw impermissible distinctions based on gender. Therefore, Bruning does not control with respect to Count I or Count III.
B. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment
Plaintiffs seek summary judgment on each of the three counts they have advanced. The Court already has granted Defendant judgment on the pleadings with respect to Count II, and further discussion of that count is unnecessary. Plaintiffs’ motion is denied to that extent, but it is granted with respect to Counts I and III.
As a general matter, the State emphasizes its prerogative to regulate marriage. The extent of this power will be discussed in greater detail below. However, while many cases have confirmed the states’ power to regulate marriage, this power is not a talisman that automatically wards off all constitutional challenges. Numerous cases confirm that the states’ power in this arena – like the states’ power in all
10

arenas – is subject to constraints imposed by the Constitution. Thus, it is no answer to the issues at hand to observe merely that the State has the power to impose regulations on the institution of marriage; the question is whether the regulations at issue comport with the Constitution.
1. Due Process: Abridgment of a Fundamental Right
In 1967, the Supreme Court considered “a constitutional question never addressed by this Court: whether a statutory scheme . . . to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 2 (1967). The Court concluded the statute violated both clauses. With respect to the Due Process Clause, the Court wrote: “These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.” 388 U.S. at 12. The Court concluded this “fundamental freedom” could not be denied based on racial classifications. Despite this apparent merging of the Due Process and Equal Protection analyses, the Court has since adhered to the view that marriage is a fundamental right entitled to protection under the Due Process Clause. “Although Loving arose in the context of racial discrimination, prior and subsequent decisions of [the Supreme] Court confirm that the right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.” Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978); see also Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 94-95 (1987) (noting the petitioners “concede[d] that the decision to marry is a fundamental right” under Supreme Court precedent).
The existence of a Due Process right to marry – separate and apart from any Equal Protection concerns – is further confirmed by Zablocki and Turner because neither of those cases involved a suspect or quasi-suspect class. Zablocki considered a state statute that prohibited non-custodial parents subject to a child support order from marrying absent judicial approval. While the statute drew a
11

distinction between those who were subject to child support orders and those who were not, it was not this classification that warranted higher scrutiny. Instead, it was the understanding “that the right to marry is part of the fundamental ‘right of privacy’ implicit in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.” 434 U.S. at 384. The Court noted “that the decision to marry has been placed on the same level of importance as decisions relating to procreation, childbirth, child rearing, and family relationships.” Id. at 386. Turner involved a regulation that required a prison warden’s approval to marry. The specter of requiring a state official’s approval of person’s worthiness for marriage caused the Supreme Court to brand the regulation as “unreasonable,” even in a prison setting.
The difficulty is that the Court has not clearly enunciated the Due Process contours of the right to marry. Indeed, it has refrained from doing so. The Zablocki Court admitted as much when it held that the right to marry – unlike other rights regarded as “fundamental” – is susceptible to significant state regulation. “By reaffirming the fundamental character of the right to marry, we do not mean to suggest that every state regulation which relates in any way to the incidents of or prerequisites for marriage must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny. To the contrary, reasonable regulations that do not significantly interfere with decisions to enter into the marital relationship may legitimately be imposed.” Id. at 386 (emphasis supplied). The difficulty then becomes: what kinds of regulations “may legitimately be imposed” and what kinds “must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny?”6
Regulations related to the effects or consequences of the marital state are not subject to exacting scrutiny. For instance, in Califano v. Jobst, 434 U.S. 47 (1977), the Supreme Court upheld a provision terminating Social Security benefits for a disabled dependent child upon the child’s marriage. Anti-nepotism policies that preclude the hiring of a husband and a wife are constitutional. E.g., Parsons v. Del
6This difficulty was raised by Justice Powell in his concurrence, where he noted that the majority opinion “does not present, however, any principled means for distinguishing between the two types of regulations. Since state regulations in this area typically take the form of prerequisite or barrier to marriage . . . the degree of ‘direct’ interference with the decision to marry . . . is unlikely to provide either guidance for state legislatures or a basis for judicial oversight.” Zablocki, 434 U.S. at 396-97 (Powell, J., concurring).
12

Norte County, 728 F.2d 1234 (9th Cir. 1984). The critical difference between these provisions and the one at issue in Zablocki is that the latter “interfere[d] directly and substantially with the right to marry,” Zablocki, 386 U.S. at 387, while the first two regulations do not restrict a person’s decision to marry or who that person marries.
It also appears accepted that the State may restrict (or even prohibit) marriage for reasons related to public health or to insure the participants are of an appropriate age to consent to a marital relationship. In concurring with the majority in Zablocki, Justice Stewart opined that a state could absolutely forbid marriage in certain circumstances: “for example, a State may legitimately say that no one can marry his or her sibling, that no one can marry who is not at least 14 years old, that no one can marry without first passing an examination for venereal disease, or that no one can marry who has a living husband or wife.” Zablocki, 434 U.S. at 392 (Stewart, J., concurring); see also Bruning, 455 F.3d at 867. However, while Justice Stewart was certain such regulations were permissible, “just as surely, in regulating the intimate human relationship of marriage, there is a limit beyond which a State may not constitutionally go.” Zablocki, 434 U.S. at 392 (Stewart, J., concurring). The Court thus accepts that these are additional regulations a state may constitutionally impose – but that this justification does not extend to every restriction a state might want to impose on a citizen’s right to decide whether – and whom – to marry.
The question then becomes: what is the State’s justification for requiring those who are to be married to be of opposite genders? Such a restriction is not a mere consequence of being married: it is a prohibition on marriage, and thus cannot be supported by cases like Califano and Parsons. The State does not suggest the prohibition is designed to promote public health or insure the consent or maturity of the participants, and any such suggestion would be unavailing in any event. These provisions flatly prohibit consenting adults from getting married for reasons unrelated to health or any other reason espoused in Justice Stewart’s concurrence. This is the type of restriction condemned by Zablocki because it significantly interferes with decisions to enter into the marital relationship. The prohibition must be examined with strict scrutiny, and viewed in that light the restriction fails to satisfy the Due Process Clause’s dictates.
13

The State suggests the restriction is rationally related to its interest in promoting consistency, uniformity and predictability.7 This is a circular argument that probably would not satisfy rational basis review and that certainly fails the level of review required in this case. The State essentially argues the restriction satisfies governmental interests because it creates a rule that can be applied by the recorders of deeds and others – but then, all restrictions create rules, so by the State’s logic any restriction is automatically constitutional simply because it creates rules that can be followed. As stated, this is circular: the rule is alleged to be constitutional because it can be followed. But then, a rule restricting marriage to those with one-syllable names promotes consistency, uniformity and predictability. A rule restricting marriage to people within a specified age difference promotes consistency, uniformity and predictability. Neither of these rules would be constitutional – the state’s ability to interfere with the personal decision as to who can and cannot get married is not so far-reaching. Merely prescribing a “followable” rule does not demonstrate the rule’s constitutionality.
The Court is left, then, with no real reason for the State’s decision to dictate that people of the same gender cannot be married. The State’s power to dictate who can and cannot be married is limited to the promotion of certain interests, none of which are served by the limitation advanced. Of course, the question is not whether the restriction satisfies the rational basis test; the Court has held the restriction burdens a fundamental right so it is subject to strict scrutiny. This requires the State to demonstrate the restriction is narrowly tailored to advance a compelling state interest – but the only interest advances is not compelling and the restriction is not
7In a footnote the State “reiterate[s] that there are many diverse motives and interests that have been advanced and analyzed by [other] courts and may certainly be applicable in this case.” Defendant’s Suggestions in Opposition (Doc. # 43) at 10 n.1. The State argues Plaintiffs bear the burden of disproving all of these unnamed motives and interests to demonstrate the restrictions fail under rational basis review. There is no need to delve into this matter because the Court has concluded a higher degree of scrutiny is required. Regardless, the better course would have been for the State to advance its justifications.
14

narrowly tailored to that interest. Accordingly, the Court holds the prohibition on same-sex marriage violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
2. Equal Protection: Classification Based on Gender
The restriction on same-sex marriage is a classification based on gender. The State’s “permission to marry” depends on the gender of the would-be participants. The State would permit Jack and Jill to be married but not Jack and John. Why? Because in the latter example, the person Jack wishes to marry is male. The State’s permission to marry depends on the genders of the participants, so the restriction is a gender-based classification.8
Restrictions based on gender are subject to intermediate scrutiny. The State bears the burden of demonstrating that the classification serves important governmental objectives and that the use of a gender-based classification is substantially related to the achievement of that objective. E.g., United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515, 532-33 (1996). The State has not carried its burden. Its sole justification for the restriction is the need to create rules that are predictable, consistent, and can be uniformly applied. Assuming this is a valid justification for a restriction, there is no suggestion as to why the gender-based classification is substantially related to that objective. A rule that ignores gender would be just as related to that objective and be just as easy to apply (and arguably would impose less of a burden on the Recorders of Deeds because they would not have to conduct any gender-based inquiry whatsoever). Regardless, administrative convenience is not a valid reason to differentiate between men and women.
8The State did not present any arguments specific to Count III, and thus did not make any argument suggesting the restriction is not a gender-based classification. However, the State conceded that intermediate scrutiny applies to such classifications. Defendant’s Suggestions in Support of Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. # 8) at 7.
15

C. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Permanent Injunction
In anticipation of winning on one or more counts on summary judgment, Plaintiffs filed a separate Motion for Permanent Injunction. The motion seeks an injunction prohibiting the “State of Missouri, including its political subdivisions, their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting in concert with them, or in connection with them, from enforcing § 451.022 RSMo; Mo. Const. art. I, § 33; and any other provision of Missouri or statutory or common law barring same sex couples from marrying.” Suggestions in Support (Doc. # 29) at 2. The problem is: the only defendant in this case is Robert T. Kelly in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds. Plaintiffs offer no binding authority explaining why a broader injunction is permissible, and the Court concludes it cannot enjoin people and officers who are not defendants in this action.
In reaching its decision in this case the Court has necessarily declared the State’s prohibition on same-sex marriages violates the Constitution. However, the only other relief that can spring from that declaration is an injunction prohibiting the sole Defendant – Kelly, acting in his official capacity – from enforcing the prohibition. In this regard, the Court agrees that Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm from being deprived of the opportunity to marry. The balance of hardships and the public interest favor enjoining Defendant Kelly because this is the only way to vindicate Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights. There is no hardship in requiring that public officials adhere to the Constitution, and the public interest is always served when the Constitution is obeyed.
D.
The Court does not take lightly a request to declare that a state law is unconstitutional. Statutes are passed by the duly elected representatives of the people. Article I, section 33 constitutes the direct expression of the people’s will. It
16

is not on a whim that the Court supplants the will of the voters or the decisions of the legislature.
But it should not be forgotten that the Constitution is also an expression of the people’s will. Indeed, it is the paramount expression of the people’s will; it cannot easily be cast aside or circumvented by a vote of the citizens of a single state. Just as Missouri citizens cannot abridge the First Amendment by amending the Missouri Constitution, they cannot abridge the Fourteenth Amendment in that manner. As Alexander Hamilton explained in describing the Constitution’s preeminent place in the rule of law:
There is no position which depends on clearer principles than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.
The Federalist No. 78 (Alexander Hamilton). Later, Hamilton described the importance of the judiciary’s role in insuring the Constitution’s role as the preeminent law of the Nation, stating the judiciary’s role includes:
guard[ing] the Constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors which the arts of designing men, or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people themselves, and which, though they speedily give place to better information, and more deliberate reflection, have a tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community.
Id. It is the Court’s view that the provisions of this statute and this section of the
Missouri Constitution contravene the United States Constitution. Having reached that conclusion, it is the Court’s obligation to give effect and force to the United States Constitution.
17

III. CONCLUSION
For these reasons, the Court 1. Grants the State’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings with respect to
Count II, but denies it in all other respects, 2. Grants Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to Counts I and
III, but denies it with respect to Count II, 3. Declares, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, that section 451.022 of the Revised
Missouri Statutes and Article I, section 33 of the Missouri Constitution, and any other provision of state law that precludes people from marrying solely because they are of the same gender9 violates the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and 4. Permanently enjoins Robert T. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds, from declining to issue a marriage license based on the genders of the applicants or otherwise enforcing the prohibition on issuing a marriage license except to a man and a woman. The effects of the judgment will be stayed until the judgment is final.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ ORTRIE DATE: November 7, 2014

Ortrie D. Smith D. SMITH, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9There are other provisions in the statute, notably provisions related to the recognition of marriages performed elsewhere. Article 1, section 33, also has implications for the recognition of marriages performed in other states. The Court’s Order and Opinion does not address this aspect of Missouri’s laws because it is beyond the purview of the claims presented.
18

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

KYLE LAWSON, et al.,

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

vs.

)

)

ROBERT T. KELLY, in his official

)

Capacity as Director of the Jackson )

County Department of Recorder of

)

Deeds,

)

)

Defendant.

)

_____________________________ )

)

STATE OF MISSOURI,

)

)

Intervenor.

)

Case No. 14-0622-CV-W-ODS

ORDER AWARDING PLAINTIFFS FEES AND COSTS AND STAYING AWARD PENDING CONCLUSION OF ALL APPEALS

On November 7, 2014, the Court entered judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor. Now pending are Plaintiffs’ Bill of Costs and Motion for Attorney Fees. Defendant has not responded and the time for doing so has passed. The State of Missouri, which has intervened in this suit, argues (1) the attorney fees should be reduced and (2) the Court should defer consideration of the motion in any event. The Court declines to defer consideration of the issue, grants the motion for fees in parts, and awards Plaintiffs their costs.
Starting with the State’s second argument: there is no question that the Court has the discretion to defer. E.g., National Farmers’ Organization, Inc. v. Associated Milk Producers, Inc., 850 F.2d 1286, 1312 (8th Cir. 1988). However, the State does not cite (and the Court cannot find) any authority dictating that the Court must defer. The task of ascertaining fees in this case is not so time-consuming that the Court believes it should exercise its discretion to defer.

Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 63 Filed 12/08/14 Page 1 of 3

There is no objection to Plaintiffs’ request for an award of costs, which they are

entitled to as the prevailing parties. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs their costs in

the amount of $100.00.

Plaintiffs seek an award of fees and expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988,

which allows an award of fees and expenses to the prevailing parties in civil rights

lawsuits such as this. In ascertaining the appropriate fee, the starting point is the

lodestar; that is, a reasonable hourly rate times a reasonable number of hours.

Plaintiffs seek compensation for the work of three attorneys at the following rates for the

following number of hours:

 Anthony Rother $350/hour

63.5

hours

 Grant Doty

$275/hour

4.9 hours

 Gillian Wilcox

$225/hour

67.6

hours

There is no objection to these hourly rates, and the Court accepts that they are the

reasonable and customary rates charged for work of this type in the geographic area.

The State argues the number of hours should be reduced to remove the time Plaintiffs

spent researching and drafting a Motion to Remand that they later withdrew. The Court

agrees.

The Motion to Remand alleged there was a defect in the removal process

because the Notice of Removal was filed by the Intervenor and not the Defendant, and

any attempt by the Defendant to remove would be untimely. If these were defects they

were procedural in nature and had no effect on this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction;

accordingly, if they were defects they could be waived. E.g., Nolan v. Prime Tanning Co., 871 F.2d 76, 78 (8th Cir. 1989). After the State responded to the Motion to

Remand, Plaintiffs formally requested to have the motion withdrawn. This request was

granted.

The Motion to Remand is separate and apart from the substantive issues in the

case, and it raised issues upon which Plaintiffs did not prevail. Moreover, the sequence

of events suggests it is unjust to force others to pay Plaintiffs the fees associated with

this endeavor. Plaintiffs insist it was reasonable for them to research and file the

motion even though they made “a strategic choice to withdraw that motion.” It may

have been reasonable to file the motion, but the Court does not believe it is reasonable

2 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 63 Filed 12/08/14 Page 2 of 3

to shift the attorney fees associated with this shift in strategies. Accounting for this time

as reflected in the attorneys’ time sheets, the Court calculates the fee award as follows:

 Anthony Rother

$350/hour

45.9 hours $16,065.00

 Grant Doty

$275/hour

4.9 hours $ 1,347.50

 Gillian Wilcox

$225/hour

63.1 hours $14,197.50

This results in a fee award of $31,610.00.

Plaintiffs also seek expenses in the amount of $165.30. As there is no objection,

this request will be granted.

In conclusion, Plaintiffs’ motion (Doc. # 55) and Bill of Costs are granted as

follows:

 Attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 in the amount of $31,610.00.

 Expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 in the amount of $165.30.

 Costs as the prevailing party pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920 in the amount of

$100.00.

This Order is stayed pending completion of all appeals.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ ORTRIE DATE: December 8, 2014

Ortrie D. Smith D. SMITH, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR

3 Case 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Document 63 Filed 12/08/14 Page 3 of 3

 
 2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

General Docket Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Docket #: 14-3779 Nature of Suit: 3950 Constitutionality of State Statutes Kyle Lawson, et al v. State of Missouri Appeal From: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City Fee Status: paid - cs

Case Type Information: 1) Civil 2) Private 3) null

Originating Court Information: District: 0866-4 : 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Trial Judge: Ortrie D. Smith, U.S. District Judge Date Filed: 07/15/2014 Date Order/Judgment: 11/07/2014

Date NOA Filed: 12/05/2014

Prior Cases: None

Current Cases: Cross-appeal

Lead 14-3779

Member 14-3780

Start

End

12/10/2014

Docketed: 12/10/2014 Termed: 07/01/2015
Date Rec'd COA: 12/08/2014

Kyle Lawson Plaintiff - Appellee
Evan Dahlgren Plaintiff - Appellee
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION Firm: 212-549-2500 18th Floor 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004-0000
Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MISSOURI FOUNDATION Firm: 314-652-3114 454 Whittier Street Saint Louis, MO 63108-0000
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MISSOURI FOUNDATION Suite 1130 906 Olive Street Saint Louis, MO 63101
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] ACLU OF MISSOURI FOUNDATION Suite 420 406 W. 34th Street Kansas City, MO 64111
Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] (see above)
1/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

Angela Curtis Plaintiff - Appellee
Shannon McGinty Plaintiff - Appellee
v.

Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Robert T. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds
Defendant
State of Missouri Intervenor Defendant - Appellant
------------------------------

Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr., Deputy Solicitor [NTC Asst. Atty General] No Longer at this Address No City,

American Military Partner Association

Abbe David Lowell

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

2/35

2/11/2019

Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

OutServe-Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

American Sociological Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
Direct: 202-974-5600 [NTC Retained] CHADBOURNE & PARKE 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Washington, DC 20036
Christopher Dowden Man Direct: 202-282-5000 [NTC Retained] WINSTON & STRAWN 1700 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-3817
Abbe David Lowell Direct: 202-974-5600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Christopher Dowden Man Direct: 202-282-5000 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Aderson Francois [NTC Retained] HOWARD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW CIVIL RIGHTS CLINIC Firm: 202-806-8082 2400 Sixth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20059
Brad W. Seiling [NTC Retained] MANATT & PHELPS 11355 W. Olympic Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90064-0000
Benjamin G. Shatz [NTC Retained] MANATT & PHELPS 11355 W. Olympic Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90064-0000
Grant A. Bermann Direct: 212-225-2000 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000
Carmine D. Boccuzzi, Jr. Direct: 212-225-2508 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000
Alexandra Eber Direct: 212-225-2000 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000
Mark A. Lightner Direct: 212-225-2000 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000
3/35

2/11/2019
President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska
Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
General Synod of the United Church of Christ Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

14-3779 Docket
Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000
Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000
Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

4/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities
Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Union for Reform Judaism Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

5/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Unitarian Universalist Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Affirmation Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

6/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Covenant Network of Presbyterians Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns
Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

7/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Methodist Federation for Social Action Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

More Light Presbyterians Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Muslims for Progressive Values Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

8/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Parity

Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Reconciling Ministries Network Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

9/35

2/11/2019
Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
COLAGE Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Family Equality Council Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Thomas E. Nanney Direct: 816-374-3228 [NTC Retained] BRYAN & CAVE Firm: 816-374-3200 3800 One Kansas City Place 1200 Main Street Kansas City, MO 64105-0000
Brian C. Walsh Direct: 314-259-2020 [NTC Retained] BRYAN & CAVE Firm: 314-259-2000 3600 One Metropolitan Square 211 N. Broadway Saint Louis, MO 63102-2186
Thomas E. Nanney Direct: 816-374-3228 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Brian C. Walsh Direct: 314-259-2020 [NTC Retained] (see above)

10/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

Americans United For Separation of Church and State Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Hannah Y.S. Chanoine [NTC Retained] DENTONS US, LLP 1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020

Richard B. Katskee Direct: 202-466-3234 [NTC Retained] AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE Firm: 202-466-3234 Suite 400 1901 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20036

Ayesha N. Khan Direct: 202-836-7136 [NTC Retained] POTOMAC LAW GROUP Suite 700 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20004

Alexander Joseph Luchenitser Direct: 202-466-3234 [NTC Retained] AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE Suite 200 1310 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005

Miriam R. Nemetz Direct: 202-263-3253 [NTC Retained] MAYER & BROWN Firm: 202-263-3000 1999 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-1101

Charles Alan Rothfeld Direct: 202-263-3233 [NTC Retained] MAYER & BROWN Firm: 202-263-3000 1999 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-1101

National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters
Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER Suite 1400 1411 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005

American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

American Psychiatric Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

Aaron Panner [NTC Retained] KELLOGG & HANSEN Firm: 202-326-7900 Suite 400 1615 M Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20036-3209

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

11/35

2/11/2019
American Psychoanalytic Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
American Psychological Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Arkansas Psychological Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
National Association of Social Workers Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Leadership Conference Education Fund Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Nathalie F.P. Gilfoyle Direct: 202-336-6186 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION 750 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20002

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Lisa Bornstein [NTC Retained] LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS 10th Floor 1629 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006

Wade Henderson [NTC Retained] LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS 10th Floor 1629 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006

Matthew Michael Hoffman Direct: 202-326-3097 [NTC Retained] FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Office of General Counsel 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20580

Andrew S. Hudson Direct: 202-326-2213 [NTC Retained] FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Division of Marketing Practices Mailstop CC-8528 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20580

Lisa Bornstein [NTC Retained] (see above)

Wade Henderson [NTC Retained] (see above)

12/35

2/11/2019
Historians of Antigay Discrimination Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
24 Employers Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
Matthew Michael Hoffman Direct: 202-326-3097 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Andrew S. Hudson Direct: 202-326-2213 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Katherine J. Duncan [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000
Madeline H. Gitomer [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000
Erica Songer [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000
Catherine Emily Stetson Direct: 202-637-5491 [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000
Mary Helen Wimberly Direct: 202-514-4510 [NTC Retained] U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Room 3224 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530-0000
Jacquelynne M. Hamilton Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Kimberley E. Lunetta Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Susan Baker Manning Direct: 202-373-6172 [NTC Retained]

13/35

2/11/2019
Gary J. Gates Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
PROMO Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Constitutional Law Scholars Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Jawad Muaddi Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Michael L. Whitlock Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Adam P. Romero Direct: 310-825-8858 [NTC Retained] UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW The Williams Institute 385 Charles E. Young Drive Los Angeles, CA 90095
Brad W. Seiling [NTC Retained] (see above)
Benjamin G. Shatz [NTC Retained] (see above)
Shane Kyle Blank Direct: 417-631-5597 [NTC Retained] 1626 Mississippi Avenue Saint Louis, MO 63104
Denise Debra Lieberman Direct: 314-780-1833 [NTC Retained] ADVANCEMENT PROJECT Suite 850 1220 L Street Washington, DC 20005
Keith D. Price Direct: 314-231-3332 [NTC Retained] SANDBERG & PHOENIX 15th Floor 600 Washington Avenue Saint Louis, MO 63101-1313
Lori Alvino McGill Direct: 202-538-8000 [NTC Retained] QUINN & EMANUEL 11th Floor 777 Sixth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001-3706
Diane M. Soubly Direct: 734-995-3110 [NTC Retained] BUTZEL & LONG Suite 500 301 E. Liberty Street

14/35

2/11/2019
Janet Jorgensen Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Cynthia Phillips Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Geoffrey Stone Direct: 773-702-4907 [NTC Retained] UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL 1111 E. 60th Street Chicago, IL 60637

Emily Elizabeth Chow Direct: 612-766-8012 [NTC Retained] FAEGRE & BAKER Firm: 612-766-7000 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901

Christopher H. Dolan Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] FAEGRE & BAKER Firm: 612-766-7000 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901

Christiana Mariko Martenson [NTC Retained] HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Firm: 612-348-6764 Government Center 300 S. Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55487-0000

Kyle Palazzolo Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND, INC.. MRO 2600 105 W. Adams Chicago, IL 60603

Michael Allen Ponto Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] FAEGRE & BAKER Firm: 612-766-7000 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901

Camilla Taylor Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] LAMBDA LEGAL Suite 2600 105 W. Adams Chicago, IL 60603

Emily Elizabeth Chow Direct: 612-766-8012 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Christopher H. Dolan Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] (see above)

15/35

2/11/2019
Historians of Marriage Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Legal Scholars Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
Christiana Mariko Martenson [NTC Retained] (see above)
Kyle Palazzolo Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Michael Allen Ponto Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Camilla Taylor Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Daniel McNeel Lane, Jr. Direct: 215-270-0800 [NTC Retained] AKIN & GUMP 1500 National Bank Plaza 300 Convent Street San Antonio, TX 78205-0000
Pratik A. Shah Direct: 202-887-4210 [NTC Retained] AKIN & GUMP Firm: 202-887-4000 Suite 400 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20036-0000
Jessica Weisel Direct: 310-229-1055 [NTC Retained] O'MELVENY & MYERS Suite 600 Firm: 310-553-6700 1999 Avenue of the Stars Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899
Sara T. Ghadiri [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
Andrew Koppelman Direct: 312-503-8431 [NTC Retained] NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY School of Law Firm: 312-503-0844 375 E. Chicago Avenue Chicago, IL 60611-0000
Joseph P. Lombardo Direct: 312-845-3428 [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
Eric S. Silvestri [NTC Retained]

16/35

2/11/2019
Chris Coleman, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Kyle Dorian, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Sly James, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
Ilya Somin Direct: 703-993-8069 [NTC Retained] GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY School of Law Firm: 703-300-3874 3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22201
Brittany L. Viola [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] HUSCH & BLACKWELL Firm: 417-268-4000 Suite 1800, The Hammons Tower 901 St. Louis Street Springfield, MO 65806
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] CITY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE Firm: 314-622-3361 314 City Hall 1200 Market Street Saint Louis, MO 63103-0000
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Firm: 816-513-3121 City Hall 414 E. 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-0000
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)

17/35

2/11/2019
Religious Institute, Inc. Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Peter Lindstrom, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Francis Slay, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Shelley Welsch, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)

18/35

2/11/2019
North Carolina Values Coalition Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Liberty, Life, and Law Foundation Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Ryan T. Anderson Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
National Association of Evangelicals Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Deborah Jane Dewart Direct: 910-326-4554 [NTC Retained] 620 E. Sabiston Drive Swansboro, NC 28584-9674
Deborah Jane Dewart Direct: 910-326-4554 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Michael Francis Smith Direct: 202-454-2860 [NTC Retained] THE SMITH APPELLATE LAW FIRM Firm: 202-454-2860 Suite 1025 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] KIRTON & MCCONKIE 1800 Eagle Gate Tower 60 E. Gate Tower Salt Lake City, UT 84111-0000
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS Firm: 410-740-3468 P.O. Box 23269 Washington, DC 20026
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] KIRTON & MCCONKIE 1800 Eagle Gate Tower 60 E. Gate Tower Salt Lake City, UT 84111-0000
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] U.S. CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS 3211 Fourth Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20017
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained]

19/35

2/11/2019
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention
Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

14-3779 Docket
(see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

20/35

2/11/2019
Alliance Defending Freedom Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Missouri Family Policy Council Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Missouri Legislative Leadership Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Liberty Counsel Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3779 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)
James Andrew Campbell Direct: 480-444-0020 [NTC Retained] ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM 15100 N. 90th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85260
Douglas G. Wardlow Direct: 612-840-8073 [NTC Retained] #300-310 14033 Commerce Avenue, N.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372
Marsha I. Stiles Direct: 417-833-9394 [NTC Retained] MIDWEST CENTER FOR LAW & JUSTICE Suite 202 1801 W. Norton Road Springfield, MO 65803
Michael Kenneth Whitehead Direct: 816-876-2600 [NTC Retained] WHITEHEAD LAW FIRM Firm: 816-876-2600 Suite 2600 1100 Main Street Kansas City, MO 64105
Mary Elizabeth McAlister Direct: 800-671-1776 [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL P.O. Box 11108 Lynchburg, VA 24506
Horatio Gabriel Mihet, Chief Counsel Direct: 800-671-1776 [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL Suite 200 P.O. Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854
Anita Staver [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL P.O. Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854
Mathew D. Staver Direct: 800-671-1776 [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL P.O. Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854
Lawrence J. Joseph Direct: 202-355-9452 [NTC Retained] LAW OFFICE OF LAWRENCE J. JOSEPH Suite 700-1A 1250 Connecticut Avenue Washington, DC 20036

21/35

2/11/2019
114 Scholars of Marriage Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

14-3779 Docket
Gene C. Schaerr [NTC Retained] LAW OFFICES OF GENE SCHAERR 332 Constitution Avenue, N.E. Washington, DC 20002

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

22/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

Kyle Lawson; Evan Dahlgren; Angela Curtis; Shannon McGinty

Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

Robert T. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds

Defendant

State of Missouri

Intervenor Defendant - Appellant

------------------------------

American Military Partner Association; OutServe-Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network; Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic; American Sociological Association; President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska; General Synod of the United Church of Christ; Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association; Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities; Union for Reform Judaism; Unitarian Universalist Association; Affirmation; Covenant Network of Presbyterians; Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns; Methodist Federation for Social Action; More Light Presbyterians; Muslims for Progressive Values; Parity; Reconciling Ministries Network; Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation; COLAGE; Family Equality Council; Americans United For Separation of Church and State; National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters; American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy; American Psychiatric Association; American Psychoanalytic Association; American Psychological Association; Arkansas Psychological Association; National Association of Social Workers; Leadership Conference Education Fund; Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; Historians of Antigay Discrimination; 24 Employers; Gary J. Gates; PROMO; Constitutional Law Scholars; Janet Jorgensen; Cynthia Phillips; Historians of Marriage; Legal Scholars; Chris Coleman, Mayor; Kyle Dorian, Mayor; Sly James, Mayor; Religious Institute, Inc.; Peter Lindstrom, Mayor; Francis Slay, Mayor; Shelley Welsch, Mayor

Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s)

North Carolina Values Coalition; Liberty, Life, and Law Foundation; Ryan T. Anderson; The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; National Association of Evangelicals; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints; Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention; The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod; Alliance Defending Freedom; Missouri Family Policy Council; Missouri Legislative Leadership; Liberty Counsel; Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund; 114 Scholars of Marriage

Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s)

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

23/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

12/10/2014

Civil case docketed. [4224599] [14-3779, 14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 12/10/2014 03:08 PM]

3 pg, 85.06 KB

12/10/2014

37 pg, 870.33 KB

MOTION to vacate stay or for an expedited appeal, filed by Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 12/10/2014. [4224617] [14-3779, 14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 12/10/2014 03:27 PM]

12/10/2014

Originating court document filed consisting of order and judgment filed 11/7/14, notice of appeal, docket

54 pg, 443.36 KB entries, [4224629] [14-3779] (PSA) [Entered: 12/10/2014 03:38 PM]

12/15/2014

APPEARANCE filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan for Appellant State of Missouri w/service 12/15/2014

1 pg, 15.61 KB [4225854] [14-3779] (JJM) [Entered: 12/15/2014 11:07 AM]

12/20/2014
2 pg, 160.92 KB

LETTER from Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 regarding advising of Armstrong v. Brenner, No. 14A650, 2014 WL 7210190 (U.S. Dec. 19, 2014), as it relates to the pending motion to vacate stay. w/service 12/20/2014 [4228125] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 12/20/2014 10:59 AM]

12/24/2014
5 pg, 81.41 KB

RESPONSE in opposition to motion vacate stay [4224617-2], motion for an expedited appeal [4224617-3] filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri , w/service 12/24/2014. [4229514] [14-3779] (JJM) [Entered: 12/24/2014 02:18 PM]

12/29/2014

METHOD of appendix preparation filed by Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779 - Separate Appendix

2 pg, 70.07 KB w/service 12/29/2014 [4229854] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 12/29/2014 02:57 PM]

12/29/2014

Certificate of transcript filed by Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779. No Transcript [4229858] [14-3779,

2 pg, 69.38 KB 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 12/29/2014 02:59 PM]

01/09/2015

LETTER from Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779

2 pg, 164.95 KB regarding motion to vacate stay or, in the alternate, expedite appeal. w/service 01/09/2015 [4233136] [14-

3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 01/09/2015 01:52 PM]

01/21/2015
4 pg, 76.9 KB

MOTION for stay, filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779 w/service 01/21/2015. [4236132] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 01/21/2015 10:31 AM]

01/21/2015
3 pg, 71.39 KB

RESPONSE in opposition to motion for stay [4236132-2] filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 , w/service 01/21/2015. [4236144] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 01/21/2015 10:55 AM]

01/22/2015
2 pg, 76.11 KB

JUDGE ORDER: Appellees' motion to vacate the district court's stay has been considered by the court, and the motion is denied. The State of Missouri's motion to stay the appeal is also denied. It is further ordered that the appellees' alternative motion to expedite the appeal is granted, and the following briefing schedule is established: Appellant's Brief and Appendix due 02/17/2015. Appellees/cross-appellants'' brief due 30 days from the date the court issues the notice of docket activity for the filing of appellant's brief. See order for further details. Adp Jan 2015 [4236892] [14-3779, 14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 01/22/2015 03:13 PM]

02/05/2015
2 pg, 223.12 KB

LETTER from Appellant State of Missouri, Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon McGinty and Not Party Robert T. Kelly in 14-3779, Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon McGinty and Appellees Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 14-3780 regarding notifying Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a) that all parties to these appeals consent to the filing of any amicus briefs in this case. w/service 02/05/2015 [4241958] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 02/05/2015 03:40 PM]

02/09/2015

MOTION vacate district court's stay of its November 7, 2014 judgment, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E.

5 pg, 246.39 KB Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779

w/service 02/09/2015. [4242668] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 02/09/2015 11:28 AM]

02/17/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

APPELLANT brief of State of Missouri in 14-3779 submitted for review. The time for filing the subsequent brief does not begin to run until the brief has been approved and filed. [4245330] [14-3779]--[Edited 02/18/2015 by CMW] (JJM) [Entered: 02/17/2015 03:38 PM]

02/17/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

Addendum of APPELLANT submitted for review by State of Missouri in 14-3779 [4245335] [14-3779]-[Edited 02/18/2015 by CMW] (JJM) [Entered: 02/17/2015 03:40 PM]

02/18/2015

33 pg, 184.58 KB

BRIEF FILED - APPELLANT BRIEF filed by State of Missouri. w/service 02/18/2015 , Length: 22 pages 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM State of Missouri due 02/23/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs . Second brief of aplee/cr. aplnt due on 03/20/2015. [4245475] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/18/2015 09:43 AM]

02/18/2015

Addendum deficiency notice sent to counsel, Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of

1 pg, 76.44 KB Missouri. New electronic copy of addendum due on 02/23/2015 [4245477] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered:

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

24/35

2/11/2019

02/18/2015 09:44 AM]

14-3779 Docket

02/18/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

Addendum of APPELLANT submitted for review by State of Missouri in 14-3779 [4245527] [14-3779] ATTACHED DOCUMENT REPLACED--[Edited 02/18/2015 by MER] (JJM) [Entered: 02/18/2015 10:32 AM]

02/18/2015

ADDENDUM of APPELLANT FILED by Appellant State of Missouri , w/service 02/18/2015 [4245673] [14-

24 pg, 274.19 KB 3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/18/2015 01:22 PM]

02/19/2015

44 pg, 112.58 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Liberty, Life, and Law Foundation and North Carolina Values Coalition w/service 02/19/2015 , Length: 6,986 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Liberty, Life, and Law Foundation and North Carolina Values Coalition due 02/24/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4245977] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/19/2015 10:39 AM]

02/19/2015

Paper copies Appellant/Petitioner Brief, [4245475-2] filed by State of Missouri 10 paper copies received. w/Addendum attached [4246238] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/19/2015 03:23 PM]

02/23/2015

43 pg, 477.93 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Ryan T. Anderson w/service 02/23/2015 , Length: 6,952 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Ryan T. Anderson due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4246978] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/23/2015 01:05 PM]

02/23/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Michael F. Smith for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Ryan T. Anderson w/service 02/23/2015 [4246994] [14-3779] COUNSEL WILL REFILE WITH CORRECTED CAPTION--[Edited 02/23/2015 by MER] (MFS) [Entered: 02/23/2015 01:29 PM]

02/23/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Michael F. Smith for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Ryan T. Anderson w/service

1 pg, 18.16 KB 02/23/2015 [4247015] [14-3779] (MFS) [Entered: 02/23/2015 02:01 PM]

02/23/2015
58 pg, 411.9 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, National Association of Evangelicals, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 14-3779, 143780 w/service 02/23/2015 , Length: 6,993 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Amici Curiae due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247131] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/23/2015 04:33 PM]

02/24/2015

MOTION interested party, Liberty Counsel , for leave to file amicus curiae brief on behalf of Appellants State of Missouri, et al. w/service 02/24/2015. [4247444] [14-3779, 14-3780] THIS DOCUMENT IS THE BRIEF SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW by amicus curiae, Liberty Counsel--[Edited 02/24/2015 by SRD] (MEM) [Entered: 02/24/2015 12:49 PM]

02/24/2015

40 pg, 108.94 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Alliance Defending Freedom in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/24/2015 , Length: 6,718 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Alliance Defending Freedom due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247561] [14-3779, 14-3780] [4247561] [14-3779, 14-3780]--[Edited to show brief filed in 14-3780 02/25/2015 by AMT] (AMT) [Entered: 02/24/2015 02:44 PM]

02/24/2015

35 pg, 104.58 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Missouri Family Policy Council in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/24/2015 , Length: 5,080 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Missouri Family Policy Council due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247607] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/24/2015 03:21 PM]

02/24/2015

APPEARANCE filed by James A. Campbell for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Alliance Defending

1 pg, 12.31 KB Freedom w/service 02/24/2015 [4247616] [14-3779] (JAC) [Entered: 02/24/2015 03:27 PM]

02/24/2015

43 pg, 179.57 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/24/2015 , Length: 6,966 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Missouri Legislative Leadership due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247664] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/24/2015 04:30 PM]

02/24/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Marsha I. Stiles for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Missouri Family Policy

1 pg, 87.44 KB Council w/service 02/24/2015 [4247677] [14-3779] (MIS) [Entered: 02/24/2015 05:21 PM]

02/24/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Michael K. Whitehead for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Missouri Legislative

1 pg, 53.62 KB Leadership w/service 02/24/2015 [4247680] [14-3779] (MKW) [Entered: 02/24/2015 07:06 PM]

02/24/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Liberty Counsel in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/25/2015 , Length: 6,995 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Liberty Counsel due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

25/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
paper briefs THIS BRIEF HAS BEEN REPLACED BY THE CORRECTED BRIEF FILED ON 02/26/2015 [4247862] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/25/2015 10:36 AM]

02/24/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4245977-2] filed by Liberty, Life, and Law Foundation and North Carolina Values Coalition 10 paper copies received. [4248234] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 08:26 AM]

02/25/2015
1 pg, 14.83 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Anthony R. Picarello, Jr. for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, National Association of Evangelicals, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops w/service 02/25/2015 [4247960] [14-3779] (ARP) [Entered: 02/25/2015 12:10 PM]

02/25/2015
2 pg, 26.03 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Alexander Dushku and R. Shawn Gunnarson for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, National Association of Evangelicals, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops w/service 02/25/2015 [4247962] [14-3779] (ARP) [Entered: 02/25/2015 12:13 PM]

02/25/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Carl H. Esbeck for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) National Association of

1 pg, 14.99 KB Evangelicals w/service 02/25/2015 [4247967] [14-3779] (ARP) [Entered: 02/25/2015 12:14 PM]

02/25/2015
4 pg, 57.28 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Mary E. McAlister, Mathew D. Staver, Anita L. Staver, Horatio G. Mihet for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Liberty Counsel w/service 02/25/2015 [4248191] [14-3779] (MEM) [Entered: 02/25/2015 08:51 PM]

02/26/2015

38 pg, 526.48 KB

BRIEF FILED - CORRECTED Amicus Brief - correcting doc # [4247862-2]. w/service 02/26/2015 , Length: 6,995 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Liberty Counsel due 03/03/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4248226] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 08:17 AM]

02/26/2015

41 pg, 202.15 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund w/service 02/26/2015 , Length: 6,879 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund due 03/03/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4248335] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 10:22 AM]

02/26/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Lawrence J. Joseph for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Eagle Forum Education &

1 pg, 12.17 KB Legal Defense Fund w/service 02/26/2015 [4248408] [14-3779] (LJJ) [Entered: 02/26/2015 11:12 AM]

02/26/2015

68 pg, 423.99 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICI BRIEF filed by 114 Scholars of Marriage in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/26/2015 , Length: 6,976 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM 114 Scholars of Marriage due 03/03/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4248624] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 02:51 PM]

02/26/2015
1 pg, 61.3 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Gene C. Schaerr for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) 114 Scholars of Marriage w/service 02/26/2015 [4248632] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 02:55 PM]

02/26/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4246978-2] filed by Ryan T. Anderson 10 paper copies received. [4248738] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 04:20 PM]

02/26/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247131-2] filed by Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, National Association of Evangelicals, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. w/Addendum attached [4248747] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 04:28 PM]

02/26/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247607-2] filed by Missouri Family Policy Council in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4248753] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 04:34 PM]

02/26/2015

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4248753-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of

2 pg, 197.02 KB Appellant(s) Missouri Family Policy Council in 14-3779 [4248774] [14-3779, 14-3780] (MIS) [Entered:

02/26/2015 05:19 PM]

02/27/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247664-2] filed by Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249756] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:26 PM]

02/27/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247561-2] filed by Alliance Defending Freedom in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249769] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:41 PM]

03/02/2015

Paper copies Corrected Amicus brief, [4248226-2] filed by Liberty Counsel in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

26/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
copies received. [4249775] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:51 PM]

03/02/2015

Paper copies Amici Brief with attached Appendix, [4248624-2] filed by 114 Scholars of Marriage in 143779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249781] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:57 PM]

03/02/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4248335-2] filed by Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund 10 paper copies received. [4249790] [14-3779] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 04:07 PM]

03/02/2015
2 pg, 11.61 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4249775-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Liberty Counsel in 14-3779 [4249823] [14-3779, 14-3780] (MEM) [Entered: 03/02/2015 05:04 PM]

03/02/2015
3 pg, 13.01 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4247561-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Alliance Defending Freedom in 14-3779 [4249828] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JAC) [Entered: 03/02/2015 05:21 PM]

03/02/2015
1 pg, 41.87 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4249756-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779 [4249832] [14-3779, 14-3780] (MKW) [Entered: 03/02/2015 05:24 PM]

03/03/2015
1 pg, 76.24 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4248624-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) 114 Scholars of Marriage in 14-3779 [4250127] [14-3779, 14-3780] (GCS) [Entered: 03/03/2015 12:50 PM]

03/04/2015

RECORD FILED - APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE APPENDIX, 2 volumes, Comments: 3 copies, Source Location: St. Louis [4250980] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/05/2015 09:21 AM]

03/13/2015
4 pg, 306.2 KB

MOTION to file an overlength brief of 15,400 words, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 03/13/2015. [4254418] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/13/2015 04:51 PM]

03/16/2015

LETTER from Appellee Kyle Lawson in 14-3779 regarding notifying court that State of Missouri has

1 pg, 153.72 KB indicated its consent to the relief requested by Appellees' motion for leave to file an overlength brief.

w/service 03/16/2015 [4254449] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/16/2015 12:30 AM]

03/16/2015
2 pg, 6.63 KB

CLERK ORDER:Granting [4254418-2] motion to file an overlength brief filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert. in 14-3779 Motion to file brief in excess of limits set forth in FRAP Rule 32 (a)(A) and (B) is granted. Brief of no more than 15,400 words may be filed. [4254749] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/16/2015 01:57 PM]

03/19/2015
2 pg, 6.83 KB

JUDGE ORDER:[4242668-2] Adp Mar 2015 [4256450] [14-3779, 14-3780] Consistent with the status of the other cases set for argument on May 12, 2015, the second motion to vacate stay is denied. (SRD) [Entered: 03/19/2015 03:06 PM]

03/20/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

APPELLEE brief of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 143780 submitted for review. The time for filing the subsequent brief does not begin to run until the brief has been approved and filed. [4257018] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/20/2015 05:39 PM]

03/23/2015
79 pg, 733.1 KB

BRIEF FILED - BRIEF APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 14-3780. w/service 03/23/2015 , Length: 14,355 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Appellees/Cross-Appellants due 03/30/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs . Third brief of State of Missouri and Robert T. Kelly brief due on 04/06/2015. [4257037] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/23/2015 08:19 AM]

03/24/2015

Paper copies Second Brief, [4257037-2] filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4257929] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/24/2015 03:14 PM]

03/25/2015
4 pg, 193.18 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Second Brief, Doc No. [4257037-2], filed by Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 [4258320] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/25/2015 01:40 PM]

03/26/2015

37 pg, 111.09 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICI BRIEF filed by American Military Partner Association and OutServe-Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/26/2015 , Length: 6,913 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM American Military Partner Association and OutServeSevicemembers Legal Defense Network due 03/31/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4258800] [14-3779, 14-3780] --[Edited to show brief filed in Case No. 14-3780 03/26/2015 by AMT] (AMT) [Entered: 03/26/2015 01:45 PM]

03/26/2015

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic in 14-3779,

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

27/35

2/11/2019

44 pg, 353.9 KB

14-3779 Docket
14-3780 w/service 03/26/2015 , Length: 6,979 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic due 03/31/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4258811] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/26/2015 01:56 PM]

03/26/2015

46 pg, 141.55 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by American Sociological Association in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/26/2015 , Length: 6,545 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM American Sociological Association due 03/31/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4258853] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/26/2015 02:58 PM]

03/26/2015
1 pg, 14.99 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Benjamin G. Shatz for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic w/service 03/26/2015 [4258980] [14-3779] (BGS) [Entered: 03/26/2015 06:53 PM]

03/26/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Denise D. Lieberman for Amici PROMO w/service 03/26/2015 [4258986] [14-3779] COUNSEL FOR AMICI PROMO WILL SUBMIT PROPOSED BRIEF VIA EMAIL AND REFILE APPEARANCE AFTER THE BRIEF HAS BEEN FILED BY THE CLERK.--[Edited 03/27/2015 by SRD] (DDL) [Entered: 03/26/2015 11:47 PM]

03/26/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Denise D. Lieberman for Amici PROMO w/service 03/26/2015 [4258987] [14-3779] COUNSEL FOR AMICI PROMO WILL SUBMIT PROPOSED BRIEF VIA EMAIL AND REFILE APPEARANCE AFTER THE BRIEF HAS BEEN FILED BY THE CLERK.--[Edited 03/27/2015 by SRD] (DDL) [Entered: 03/26/2015 11:52 PM]

03/26/2015

50 pg, 209.23 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,442 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259594] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 10:26 AM]

03/26/2015
46 pg, 231.6 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by COLAGE and Family Equality Council in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,829 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM COLAGE and Family Equality Council due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259607] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 10:40 AM]

03/26/2015

51 pg, 238.07 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,905 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Americans United For Separation of Church and State due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259628] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 11:02 AM]

03/26/2015

46 pg, 125.02 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Arkansas Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers and National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,997 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Arkansas Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers and National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259673] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 11:34 AM]

03/26/2015

50 pg, 226.59 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 5,908 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259692] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 11:54 AM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

28/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

03/27/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Christopher D. Man for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) OutServe-Sevicemembers

1 pg, 26.01 KB Legal Defense Network w/service 03/27/2015 [4259000] [14-3779] (CDM) [Entered: 03/27/2015 07:36 AM]

03/27/2015

50 pg, 417.84 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Historians of Antigay Discrimination in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,986 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Historians of Antigay Discrimination due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259744] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:05 PM]

03/27/2015

53 pg, 244.78 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by 24 Employers in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,954 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM 24 Employers due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs Individual employers named in brief. [4259756] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:21 PM]

03/27/2015
33 pg, 298.6 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Gary J. Gates in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 4,713 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Gary J. Gates due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259776] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:36 PM]

03/27/2015

47 pg, 324.88 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by PROMO in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 7,160 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM PROMO due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259801] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:58 PM]

03/30/2015

45 pg, 179.15 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Constitutional Law Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,968 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Constitutional Law Scholars due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs Individual scholars named in brief. [4259489] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 08:15 AM]

03/30/2015

38 pg, 149.43 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,366 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259902] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 03:25 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Carmine D. Boccuzzi, Jr. for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) American

1 pg, 12.48 KB Sociological Association w/service 03/30/2015 [4259909] [14-3779] (CDB) [Entered: 03/30/2015 03:35 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Michael A. Ponto for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 40.52 KB Phillips w/service 03/30/2015 [4259932] [14-3779] (MAP) [Entered: 03/30/2015 04:08 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Christiana M. Martenson for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and

1 pg, 49.74 KB Cynthia Phillips w/service 03/30/2015 [4259936] [14-3779] (CMM) [Entered: 03/30/2015 04:12 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Christopher H. Dolan for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and

1 pg, 40.58 KB Cynthia Phillips w/service 03/30/2015 [4259937] [14-3779] (CHD) [Entered: 03/30/2015 04:15 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Emily E. Chow for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 44.95 KB Phillips w/service 03/30/2015 [4259938] [14-3779] (EEC) [Entered: 03/30/2015 04:19 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Camilla B. Taylor for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 40.18 KB Phillips w/service 03/30/2015 [4259940] [14-3779] (CT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 04:22 PM]

03/30/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Kyle A. Palazzolo for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 54.73 KB Phillips w/service 03/30/2015 [4259943] [14-3779] (KP) [Entered: 03/30/2015 04:26 PM]

03/30/2015

41 pg, 122.99 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Historians of Marriage in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/31/2015 , Length: 5,606 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Historians of Marriage due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs Historians of Marriage individuals named within the brief. [4259999] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 07:57 AM]

03/30/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4258811-2] filed by Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic in 143779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260471] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 03:49 PM]

03/30/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259607-2], Amicus Brief, [4259226-2], Amicus Brief, [4259142-2] filed by COLAGE and Family Equality Council in 14-3779, 14-3780, 15-1022, 15-1186 10 paper copies received. 10 copies only approved by Clerk of Court. [4260506] [14-3779, 14-3780, 15-1022, 15-1186] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 04:28 PM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

29/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket

03/31/2015

50 pg, 336.14 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Legal Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/31/2015 , Length: 8,231 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Legal Scholars due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs The individual Legal Scholars are named within the brief. [4260075] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:32 AM]

03/31/2015
28 pg, 69.8 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/31/2015 , Length: 3,323 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Chris Coleman, et al due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4260120] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 10:19 AM]

03/31/2015
1 pg, 12.38 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Charles Rothfeld for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Americans United For Separation of Church and State w/service 03/31/2015 [4260204] [14-3779] (CAR) [Entered: 03/31/2015 11:50 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Shane K. Blank for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) PROMO w/service 03/31/2015

1 pg, 47.04 KB [4260217] [14-3779] (SKB) [Entered: 03/31/2015 12:07 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Pratik A. Shah for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Historians of Marriage

10 pg, 57.51 KB w/service 03/31/2015 [4260262] [14-3779] (PAS) [Entered: 03/31/2015 01:13 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Jessica M. Weisel for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Historians of Marriage

10 pg, 57.53 KB w/service 03/31/2015 [4260276] [14-3779] (JW) [Entered: 03/31/2015 01:21 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Susan Baker Manning for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) 24 Employers w/service

1 pg, 14.52 KB 03/31/2015 [4260355] [14-3779] (SBM) [Entered: 03/31/2015 02:25 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Benjamin G. Shatz for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Gary J. Gates w/service

1 pg, 19.57 KB 03/31/2015 [4260418] [14-3779] (BGS) [Entered: 03/31/2015 03:05 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Diane M. Soubly for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Constitutional Law Scholars

1 pg, 15.43 KB w/service 03/31/2015 [4260537] [14-3779] (DMS) [Entered: 03/31/2015 05:26 PM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4258800-2] filed by American Military Partner Association and OutServeSevicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260578] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 08:20 AM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259673-2] filed by American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Arkansas Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers and National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters in 14-3779, 143780 10 paper copies received. [4260600] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 09:06 AM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259692-2] filed by Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260866] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:13 PM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259801-2] filed by PROMO in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260869] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:15 PM]

04/01/2015

APPEARANCE filed by J. Michael Bridges for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian,

1 pg, 110.74 KB Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch w/service 04/01/2015 [4260620] [14-3779]

(JMB) [Entered: 04/01/2015 09:41 AM]

04/01/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4258853-2] filed by American Sociological Association in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260872] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:17 PM]

04/01/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259999-2] filed by Historians of Marriage in 14-3779, 14-3780 11 paper copies received. [4260875] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:19 PM]

04/01/2015
3 pg, 18.24 KB

MOTION to withdraw as retained counsel, filed by Attorney Mr. Grant R Doty for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 04/01/2015. [4260954] [143779, 14-3780] (GRD) [Entered: 04/01/2015 03:53 PM]

04/02/2015
3 pg, 9.42 KB

CLERK ORDER: Granting [4260954-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Grant R Doty. in 14-3779 Mr. Grant R Doty for Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 143780 has been granted leave to withdraw from these cases. [4261047] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/02/2015 08:36 AM]

04/02/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259756-2] filed by 24 Employers in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

30/35

2/11/2019

14-3779 Docket
received. [4261255] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:58 AM]

04/02/2015
5 pg, 13.46 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4258800-2], filed by Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) American Military Partner Association and OutServe-Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3779, Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) American Military Partner Association and OutServeServicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3780 [4261316] [14-3779, 14-3780] (CDM) [Entered: 04/02/2015 01:16 PM]

04/02/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259628-2] filed by Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4261359] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:06 PM]

04/02/2015
8 pg, 58.37 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4259756-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) 24 Employers in 14-3779 [4261569] [14-3779, 14-3780] (SBM) [Entered: 04/02/2015 05:56 PM]

04/03/2015

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4260869-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of

9 pg, 204.98 KB Appellee(s) PROMO in 14-3779 [4261666] [14-3779, 14-3780] (SKB) [Entered: 04/03/2015 09:50 AM]

04/03/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259902-2] filed by Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4261772] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/03/2015 11:14 AM]

04/03/2015
5 pg, 25.71 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4261772-2], filed by Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips in 14-3779 [4261838] [14-3779, 14-3780] (EEC) [Entered: 04/03/2015 12:18 PM]

04/03/2015

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4260875-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of

10 pg, 38.42 KB Appellee(s) Historians of Marriage in 14-3779, Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Historians of Marriage in

14-3780 [4261926] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JW) [Entered: 04/03/2015 03:01 PM]

04/03/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Catherine E. Stetson for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Historians of Antigay

1 pg, 27.87 KB Discrimination w/service 04/03/2015 [4261976] [14-3779] (CES) [Entered: 04/03/2015 03:39 PM]

04/03/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Denise D. Lieberman for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) PROMO w/service

1 pg, 273.11 KB 04/03/2015 [4262053] [14-3779] (SKB) [Entered: 04/03/2015 10:53 PM]

04/03/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4260120-2] filed by Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262148] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 09:29 AM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259744-2] filed by Historians of Antigay Discrimination in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262311] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:20 PM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4260075-2] filed by Legal Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262317] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:25 PM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259489-2] filed by Constitutional Law Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262343] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:52 PM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259776-2] filed by Gary J. Gates in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262348] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:58 PM]

04/06/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

THIRD brief of State of Missouri in 14-3779, 14-3780 submitted for review. The time for filing the subsequent brief does not begin to run until the brief has been approved and filed. [4262370] [14-3779, 143780] (JJM) [Entered: 04/06/2015 03:35 PM]

04/06/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Joseph P. Lombardo for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Legal Scholars w/service

3 pg, 108.77 KB 04/06/2015 [4262381] [14-3779] (JPL) [Entered: 04/06/2015 04:00 PM]

04/08/2015
1 pg, 64.66 KB

LETTER from Appellee Robert T. Kelly in 14-3780 notifying the Court they will not be filing a brief in this case - - FOR CAL. w/service 04/07/2015 [4263053] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JDH) [Entered: 04/08/2015 10:57 AM]

04/08/2015

22 pg, 180.78 KB

BRIEF FILED - REPLY APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE filed by State of Missouri in 14-3779, 14-3780, w/service 04/08/2015 , Length: 1,681 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM State of Missouri due 04/13/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs . Fourth brief of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty due 04/15/2015 [4263060] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/08/2015 11:07 AM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

31/35

2/11/2019
04/08/2015
1 pg, 153.97 KB

14-3779 Docket
LETTER from Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 notifying the Court they will not be filing a brief in this case - - FOR CAL. w/service 04/08/2015 [4263236] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/08/2015 02:14 PM]

04/08/2015

SET FOR ARGUMENT - CASE PLACED ON CALENDAR - for Argument in Omaha on Tuesday, May 12, 2015. To be heard before Judges Roger L. Wollman, Lavenski R. Smith and Duane Benton in Division I. The courtroom deputy will be Lorri Brown. All attorneys presenting oral argument must complete a Response Form. The Response Form may be found at http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/newcoa/forms/OralArgumentResponseForm.pdf. For the complete calendar go to http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/webcal/may15omh.pdf PLEASE REVIEW THE ENTIRE CALENDAR CAREFULLY, PARTICULARLY THE COUNSEL NOTICE PAGE. If you are appointed counsel under the Criminal Justice Act and require airline transportation to oral argument, the court will issue a travel authorization the next business day. [4263334] [14-3779, 14-3780] (TAB) [Entered: 04/08/2015 03:29 PM]

04/08/2015
2 pg, 27.51 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Jeffrey S. Trachtman for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/08/2015 [4263479] [14-3779] (JST) [Entered: 04/08/2015 06:13 PM]

04/08/2015
2 pg, 29.33 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Michelle Ben-David for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/08/2015 [4263480] [14-3779] (JST) [Entered: 04/08/2015 06:19 PM]

04/08/2015
2 pg, 28.77 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Catherine Hoge for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/08/2015 [4263481] [14-3779] (JST) [Entered: 04/08/2015 06:23 PM]

04/08/2015
2 pg, 31.06 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Jason M. Moff for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/08/2015 [4263482] [14-3779] (JST) [Entered: 04/08/2015 06:27 PM]

04/08/2015
2 pg, 31.05 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Kurt M. Denk for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/08/2015 [4263483] [14-3779] (JST) [Entered: 04/08/2015 06:30 PM]

04/08/2015
2 pg, 31.06 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Norman C. Simon for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/08/2015 [4263484] [14-3779] (JST) [Entered: 04/08/2015 06:32 PM]

04/09/2015

MOTION to withdraw as retained counsel, filed by Attorney Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck for Amicus on

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

32/35

2/11/2019

3 pg, 67.37 KB

14-3779 Docket
Behalf of Appellee(s) Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3780 w/service 04/09/2015. [4263674] [14-3779, 14-3780] (SMN) [Entered: 04/09/2015 11:34 AM]

04/09/2015
2 pg, 6.7 KB

CLERK ORDER:Granting [4263674-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck in 14-3779, 14-3780. Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck for Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, 14-3780 has been granted leave to withdraw from these cases. [4263720] [14-3779, 14-3780] -[Edited 04/09/2015 by AMT] (AMT) [Entered: 04/09/2015 01:01 PM]

04/09/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259594-2] filed by President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska et al. in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4263731] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/09/2015 01:21 PM]

04/10/2015
3 pg, 238.48 KB

MOTION to split argument time, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellants Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 w/service 04/10/2015. [4263952] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/10/2015 07:15 AM]

04/10/2015

JUDGE ORDER:Granting [4263952-2] motion split argument time filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert. Hrg May

2 pg, 10.04 KB 2015 [4264237] [14-3779, 14-3780] (KAS) [Entered: 04/10/2015 01:51 PM]

04/10/2015

Paper copies Third Brief, [4263060-2] filed by State of Missouri in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4264507] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/13/2015 11:13 AM]

04/14/2015

ARGUMENT RESPONSE/APPEARANCE FORM filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Kyle Lawson, Evan

1 pg, 196.08 KB Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 for argument in May, at the U.S. Courthouse in

Omaha, Nebraska. [4265051] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/14/2015 11:15 AM]

04/14/2015
1 pg, 62.22 KB

ARGUMENT RESPONSE/APPEARANCE FORM filed by Mr. Joshua A. Block for Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 for argument in May, at the U.S. Courthouse in Omaha, Nebraska. [4265132] [14-3780, 14-3779] (JAB) [Entered: 04/14/2015 01:10 PM]

04/14/2015
4 pg, 12.68 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4259744-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Historians of Antigay Discrimination in 14-3779 [4265373] [14-3779, 14-3780] (CES) [Entered: 04/14/2015 05:04 PM]

04/15/2015
1 pg, 16.96 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Matthew M. Hoffman for Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights w/service 04/15/2015 [4265651] [14-3779] (MMH) [Entered: 04/15/2015 01:44 PM]

04/16/2015

Mail sent to Attorney Brad Seiling for Amici on Behalf of Appellees/Cross-Appellants Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic and Gary J. Gates in 14-3779, 14-3780 on 03/26/2015 was returned on 04/16/2015 Reason Mail Returned: Return to Sender. Not Deliverable as Addressedd. Unable to Forward. Resent letter to counsel's corrected address on 04/16/2016. [4266129] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/16/2015 03:48 PM]

04/17/2015
1 pg, 75.76 KB

ARGUMENT RESPONSE/APPEARANCE FORM filed by Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for State of Missouri in 14-3779, Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 14-3780 for argument in May, at the U.S. Courthouse in Omaha, Nebraska. [4266301] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 04/17/2015 11:29 AM]

04/21/2015

CLERK LETTER sent regarding attendance at oral argument. [4267306] [14-3779, 14-3780, 15-1022, 15-

1 pg, 32.89 KB 1186, 15-1452] (SRD) [Entered: 04/21/2015 02:34 PM]

04/23/2015

LETTER from Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780

1 pg, 150.49 KB regarding estimate of the number of lawyers and parties attending oral argument. w/service 04/23/2015

[4268313] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/23/2015 03:14 PM]

04/24/2015
1 pg, 25.01 KB

LETTER from Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Chris Coleman, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3779, Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3780 regarding Oral Argument attendance. w/service 04/24/2015 [4268665] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JMB) [Entered: 04/24/2015 12:37 PM]

04/27/2015

LETTER from Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779 regarding

1 pg, 181.69 KB Attendance at the Oral Argument to be held on May 12, 2015.. w/service 04/27/2015 [4269104] [14-3779,

14-3780] (MKW) [Entered: 04/27/2015 11:46 AM]

04/29/2015

LETTER from Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779, Appellee State of Missouri in 14-3780 regarding

1 pg, 119.28 KB attendance at Oral Argument. w/service 04/29/2015 [4270124] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered:

04/29/2015 12:40 PM]

04/29/2015

JUDGE ORDER: On the court's own motion, oral arguments and any further consideration of these cases

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

33/35

2/11/2019

2 pg, 10.23 KB

14-3779 Docket
will be deferred pending the Supreme Court of the United States' decisions in Nos. 14-556, 14-562, 14571, and 14-574 James Obergefell, et al. v. Richard Hodges, etc., et al. Hrg May 2015 [4270144] [14-3779, 14-3780] (KAS) [Entered: 04/29/2015 01:09 PM]

06/26/2015

MOTION vacate district court's stay of judgment, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees

6 pg, 415.05 KB Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 06/26/2015.

[4289068] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 06/26/2015 09:11 AM]

06/26/2015
3 pg, 69.86 KB

MOTION to dismiss case, filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellees Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 143780 w/service 06/26/2015. [4289155] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 06/26/2015 10:45 AM]

06/30/2015

RESPONSE with no opposition to motion to dismiss case [4289155-2] filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E.

3 pg, 226.81 KB Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 ,

w/service 06/30/2015. [4290546] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 06/30/2015 02:41 PM]

07/01/2015
3 pg, 17.89 KB

JUDGMENT FILED - The State of Missouri's motion to dismiss its appeal in No. 14-3779 is granted. Appellees/Cross-Appellants' motion to dismiss their cross-appeal in No. 14-3880 is also granted. Appellees/Cross-Appellants' motion to vacate the district court's stay order is denied as moot. The court's mandate shall issue forthwith. [4289155-2], [4289068-2].. ROGER L. WOLLMAN, LAVENSKI R. SMITH and DUANE BENTON Hrg May 2015 [4291146] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 07/01/2015 04:18 PM]

07/01/2015
2 pg, 9.99 KB

MANDATE ISSUED. [4291161] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 07/01/2015 04:32 PM]

07/15/2015
50 pg, 6.56 MB

MOTION for attorney fees in the amount of 27883.50, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 07/15/2015. [4295767] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 07/15/2015 08:58 PM]

07/22/2015
3 pg, 72.79 KB

RESPONSE motion for attorney fees [4295767-2] filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellees Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 14-3780 , w/service 07/22/2015. [4297869] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 07/22/2015 10:31 AM]

07/24/2015
2 pg, 10.17 KB

JUDGE ORDER:Granting [4295767-2] motion for attorney fees filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert. in 14-3779 Amount of fees granted $27,883.50 (Twenty-seven thousand eight hundred eighty-three dollars and fifty cents). Hrg May 2015 [4298684] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 07/24/2015 08:51 AM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

34/35

2/11/2019
Clear All

14-3779 Docket

Documents and Docket Summary Documents Only

Include Page Numbers

elected Pages: 0

Selected Size: KB

(Max: 10 MB)

otals reflect accessible documents only and do not include unauthorized restricted documents.

View Selected

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

8th Circuit Court of Appeals - 02/11/2019 09:32:04

PACER Login:

CRClearinghouse

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report (filtered)

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 22

Cost:

14-3779 2.20

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

35/35

 
 2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket

General Docket Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Docket #: 14-3780 Nature of Suit: 3950 Constitutionality of State Statutes Kyle Lawson, et al v. Robert Kelly, et al Appeal From: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City Fee Status: paid - cs

Case Type Information: 1) Civil 2) Private 3) null

Originating Court Information: District: 0866-4 : 4:14-cv-00622-ODS Trial Judge: Ortrie D. Smith, U.S. District Judge Date Filed: 07/15/2014 Date Order/Judgment: 11/07/2014

Date NOA Filed: 12/08/2014

Prior Cases: None

Current Cases: Cross-appeal

Lead 14-3779

Member 14-3780

Start

End

12/10/2014

Docketed: 12/10/2014 Termed: 07/01/2015
Date Rec'd COA: 12/09/2014

Kyle Lawson Plaintiff - Appellant
Evan Dahlgren Plaintiff - Appellant
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION Firm: 212-549-2500 18th Floor 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004-0000
Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MISSOURI FOUNDATION Firm: 314-652-3114 454 Whittier Street Saint Louis, MO 63108-0000
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MISSOURI FOUNDATION Suite 1130 906 Olive Street Saint Louis, MO 63101
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] ACLU OF MISSOURI FOUNDATION Suite 420 406 W. 34th Street Kansas City, MO 64111
Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] (see above)
1/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket

Angela Curtis Plaintiff - Appellant
Shannon McGinty Plaintiff - Appellant
v.

Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Joshua A. Block Direct: 212-549-2627 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Andrew McNulty Direct: 314-669-3418 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony E. Rothert Direct: 314-669-3420 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Gillian R. Wilcox Direct: 816-470-9938 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Robert T. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds
Defendant - Appellee

Jay D. Haden Direct: 816-881-3355 [NTC Retained] COUNTY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE 200 2nd Floor, Jackson County Courthouse 415 E. 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-0000
Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr., Deputy Solicitor [NTC Asst. Atty General]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

2/33

2/11/2019
State of Missouri Intervenor Defendant - Appellee
-----------------------------American Military Partner Association
Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
OutServe-Servicemembers Legal Defense Network Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
American Sociological Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
No Longer at this Address No City,
Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr., Deputy Solicitor [NTC Asst. Atty General] (see above)
Abbe David Lowell Direct: 202-974-5600 [NTC Retained] CHADBOURNE & PARKE 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W. Washington, DC 20036
Christopher Dowden Man Direct: 202-282-5000 [NTC Retained] WINSTON & STRAWN 1700 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-3817
Abbe David Lowell Direct: 202-974-5600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Christopher Dowden Man Direct: 202-282-5000 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Aderson Francois [NTC Retained] HOWARD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW CIVIL RIGHTS CLINIC Firm: 202-806-8082 2400 Sixth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20059
Brad W. Seiling [NTC Retained] MANATT & PHELPS 11355 W. Olympic Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90064-0000
Benjamin G. Shatz [NTC Retained] MANATT & PHELPS 11355 W. Olympic Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90064-0000
Grant A. Bermann Direct: 212-225-2000 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000
Carmine D. Boccuzzi, Jr. Direct: 212-225-2508 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000
Alexandra Eber Direct: 212-225-2000 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB
3/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000

Mark A. Lightner Direct: 212-225-2000 [NTC Retained] CLEARY & GOTTLIEB One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006-0000

President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska
Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] KRAMER & LEVIN 1177 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-0000

General Synod of the United Church of Christ Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

4/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
(see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities
Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

5/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Union for Reform Judaism Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Unitarian Universalist Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Affirmation Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

6/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Covenant Network of Presbyterians Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns
Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

7/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Methodist Federation for Social Action Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

More Light Presbyterians Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

8/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Muslims for Progressive Values Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Parity

Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Reconciling Ministries Network Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

9/33

2/11/2019
Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Religious Institute, Inc. Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Michelle Ben-David Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Kurt Denk Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Catherine L. Hoge Direct: 212-715-9493 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jason Moff Direct: 212-715-9100

10/33

2/11/2019
COLAGE Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Family Equality Council Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Americans United For Separation of Church and State Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)
Norman Simon Direct: 212-715-9100 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Jeffrey S. Trachtman Direct: 212-715-9175 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Thomas E. Nanney Direct: 816-374-3228 [NTC Retained] BRYAN & CAVE Firm: 816-374-3200 3800 One Kansas City Place 1200 Main Street Kansas City, MO 64105-0000
Brian C. Walsh Direct: 314-259-2020 [NTC Retained] BRYAN & CAVE Firm: 314-259-2000 3600 One Metropolitan Square 211 N. Broadway Saint Louis, MO 63102-2186
Thomas E. Nanney Direct: 816-374-3228 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Brian C. Walsh Direct: 314-259-2020 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Hannah Y.S. Chanoine [NTC Retained] DENTONS US, LLP 1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020
Richard B. Katskee Direct: 202-466-3234 [NTC Retained] AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE Firm: 202-466-3234 Suite 400 1901 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20036
Ayesha N. Khan Direct: 202-836-7136 [NTC Retained] POTOMAC LAW GROUP Suite 700 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20004
Alexander Joseph Luchenitser Direct: 202-466-3234 [NTC Retained] AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE Suite 200
11/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
1310 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005

Miriam R. Nemetz Direct: 202-263-3253 [NTC Retained] MAYER & BROWN Firm: 202-263-3000 1999 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-1101

Charles Alan Rothfeld Direct: 202-263-3233 [NTC Retained] MAYER & BROWN Firm: 202-263-3000 1999 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-1101

National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters
Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER Suite 1400 1411 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005

American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

American Psychiatric Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Aaron Panner [NTC Retained] KELLOGG & HANSEN Firm: 202-326-7900 Suite 400 1615 M Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20036-3209

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

American Psychoanalytic Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

American Psychological Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Nathalie F.P. Gilfoyle Direct: 202-336-6186 [NTC Retained] AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION 750 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20002

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Arkansas Psychological Association Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901 [NTC Retained] (see above)

National Association of Social Workers Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Paul March Smith Direct: 202-856-7901

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

12/33

2/11/2019
Leadership Conference Education Fund Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Historians of Antigay Discrimination Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)

Lisa Bornstein [NTC Retained] LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS 10th Floor 1629 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006

Wade Henderson [NTC Retained] LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS 10th Floor 1629 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006

Matthew Michael Hoffman Direct: 202-326-3097 [NTC Retained] FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Office of General Counsel 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20580

Andrew S. Hudson Direct: 202-326-2213 [NTC Retained] FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Division of Marketing Practices Mailstop CC-8528 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20580

Lisa Bornstein [NTC Retained] (see above)

Wade Henderson [NTC Retained] (see above)

Matthew Michael Hoffman Direct: 202-326-3097 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Andrew S. Hudson Direct: 202-326-2213 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Katherine J. Duncan [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000

Madeline H. Gitomer [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000

Erica Songer [NTC Retained]

13/33

2/11/2019
24 Employers Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Gary J. Gates Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000
Catherine Emily Stetson Direct: 202-637-5491 [NTC Retained] HOGAN & LOVELLS Firm: 202-637-5600 Columbia Square 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-0000
Mary Helen Wimberly Direct: 202-514-4510 [NTC Retained] U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Room 3224 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530-0000
Jacquelynne M. Hamilton Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Kimberley E. Lunetta Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Susan Baker Manning Direct: 202-373-6172 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Jawad Muaddi Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Michael L. Whitlock Direct: 202-373-6000 [NTC Retained] MORGAN & LEWIS 2020 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006
Adam P. Romero Direct: 310-825-8858 [NTC Retained] UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW The Williams Institute 385 Charles E. Young Drive Los Angeles, CA 90095
Brad W. Seiling [NTC Retained] (see above)

14/33

2/11/2019
PROMO Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Constitutional Law Scholars Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Janet Jorgensen Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
Benjamin G. Shatz [NTC Retained] (see above)
Shane Kyle Blank Direct: 417-631-5597 [NTC Retained] 1626 Mississippi Avenue Saint Louis, MO 63104
Denise Debra Lieberman Direct: 314-780-1833 [NTC Retained] ADVANCEMENT PROJECT Suite 850 1220 L Street Washington, DC 20005
Keith D. Price Direct: 314-231-3332 [NTC Retained] SANDBERG & PHOENIX 15th Floor 600 Washington Avenue Saint Louis, MO 63101-1313
Lori Alvino McGill Direct: 202-538-8000 [NTC Retained] QUINN & EMANUEL 11th Floor 777 Sixth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001-3706
Diane M. Soubly Direct: 734-995-3110 [NTC Retained] BUTZEL & LONG Suite 500 301 E. Liberty Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Geoffrey Stone Direct: 773-702-4907 [NTC Retained] UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL 1111 E. 60th Street Chicago, IL 60637
Emily Elizabeth Chow Direct: 612-766-8012 [NTC Retained] FAEGRE & BAKER Firm: 612-766-7000 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901
Christopher H. Dolan Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] FAEGRE & BAKER Firm: 612-766-7000 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901
Christiana Mariko Martenson [NTC Retained]

15/33

2/11/2019
Cynthia Phillips Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Historians of Marriage Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Firm: 612-348-6764 Government Center 300 S. Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55487-0000

Kyle Palazzolo Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND, INC.. MRO 2600 105 W. Adams Chicago, IL 60603

Michael Allen Ponto Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] FAEGRE & BAKER Firm: 612-766-7000 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901

Camilla Taylor Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] LAMBDA LEGAL Suite 2600 105 W. Adams Chicago, IL 60603

Emily Elizabeth Chow Direct: 612-766-8012 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Christopher H. Dolan Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Christiana Mariko Martenson [NTC Retained] (see above)

Kyle Palazzolo Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Michael Allen Ponto Direct: 612-766-7000 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Camilla Taylor Direct: 312-663-4413 [NTC Retained] (see above)

Daniel McNeel Lane, Jr. Direct: 215-270-0800 [NTC Retained] AKIN & GUMP 1500 National Bank Plaza 300 Convent Street San Antonio, TX 78205-0000

Pratik A. Shah

16/33

2/11/2019
Legal Scholars Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Chris Coleman, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
Direct: 202-887-4210 [NTC Retained] AKIN & GUMP Firm: 202-887-4000 Suite 400 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20036-0000
Jessica Weisel Direct: 310-229-1055 [NTC Retained] O'MELVENY & MYERS Suite 600 Firm: 310-553-6700 1999 Avenue of the Stars Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899
Sara T. Ghadiri [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
Andrew Koppelman Direct: 312-503-8431 [NTC Retained] NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY School of Law Firm: 312-503-0844 375 E. Chicago Avenue Chicago, IL 60611-0000
Joseph P. Lombardo Direct: 312-845-3428 [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
Eric S. Silvestri [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
Ilya Somin Direct: 703-993-8069 [NTC Retained] GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY School of Law Firm: 703-300-3874 3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22201
Brittany L. Viola [NTC Retained] CHAPMAN & CUTLER 111 W. Monroe Street Chicago, IL 60603
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] HUSCH & BLACKWELL Firm: 417-268-4000 Suite 1800, The Hammons Tower 901 St. Louis Street Springfield, MO 65806
Winston Edward Calvert

17/33

2/11/2019
Kyle Dorian, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Sly James, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Peter Lindstrom, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Francis Slay, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] CITY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE Firm: 314-622-3361 314 City Hall 1200 Market Street Saint Louis, MO 63103-0000
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Firm: 816-513-3121 City Hall 414 E. 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-0000
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained]

18/33

2/11/2019
Shelley Welsch, Mayor Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s)
Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention
Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
National Association of Evangelicals Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
(see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Michael Bridges Direct: 417-268-4053 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Winston Edward Calvert Direct: 314-622-3361 [NTC Retained] (see above)
William Dean Geary, Assistant City Attorney Direct: 816-513-3142 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] KIRTON & MCCONKIE 1800 Eagle Gate Tower 60 E. Gate Tower Salt Lake City, UT 84111-0000
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS Firm: 410-740-3468 P.O. Box 23269 Washington, DC 20026
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] KIRTON & MCCONKIE 1800 Eagle Gate Tower 60 E. Gate Tower Salt Lake City, UT 84111-0000
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] U.S. CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS 3211 Fourth Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20017
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300

19/33

2/11/2019
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Alliance Defending Freedom Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

14-3780 Docket
[NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Alexander Dushku Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Carl H. Esbeck Direct: 573-882-6543 [NTC Retained] (see above)
R. Shawn Gunnarson Direct: 801-328-3600 [NTC Retained] (see above)
Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., General Counsel Direct: 202-541-3300 [NTC Retained] (see above)
James Andrew Campbell Direct: 480-444-0020 [NTC Retained] ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM 15100 N. 90th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85260

20/33

2/11/2019
Missouri Family Policy Council Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Missouri Legislative Leadership Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
Liberty Counsel Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)
114 Scholars of Marriage Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s)

14-3780 Docket
Douglas G. Wardlow Direct: 612-840-8073 [NTC Retained] #300-310 14033 Commerce Avenue, N.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372
Marsha I. Stiles Direct: 417-833-9394 [NTC Retained] MIDWEST CENTER FOR LAW & JUSTICE Suite 202 1801 W. Norton Road Springfield, MO 65803
Michael Kenneth Whitehead Direct: 816-876-2600 [NTC Retained] WHITEHEAD LAW FIRM Firm: 816-876-2600 Suite 2600 1100 Main Street Kansas City, MO 64105
Mary Elizabeth McAlister Direct: 800-671-1776 [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL P.O. Box 11108 Lynchburg, VA 24506
Horatio Gabriel Mihet, Chief Counsel Direct: 800-671-1776 [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL Suite 200 P.O. Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854
Anita Staver [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL P.O. Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854
Mathew D. Staver Direct: 800-671-1776 [NTC Retained] LIBERTY COUNSEL P.O. Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854
Gene C. Schaerr [NTC Retained] LAW OFFICES OF GENE SCHAERR 332 Constitution Avenue, N.E. Washington, DC 20002

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

21/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket

Kyle Lawson; Evan Dahlgren; Angela Curtis; Shannon McGinty

Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

Robert T. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds

Defendant - Appellee

State of Missouri

Intervenor Defendant - Appellee

------------------------------

American Military Partner Association; OutServe-Servicemembers Legal Defense Network; Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic; American Sociological Association; President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska; General Synod of the United Church of Christ; Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association; Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities; Union for Reform Judaism; Unitarian Universalist Association; Affirmation; Covenant Network of Presbyterians; Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns; Methodist Federation for Social Action; More Light Presbyterians; Muslims for Progressive Values; Parity; Reconciling Ministries Network; Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation; Religious Institute, Inc.; COLAGE; Family Equality Council; Americans United For Separation of Church and State; National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters; American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy; American Psychiatric Association; American Psychoanalytic Association; American Psychological Association; Arkansas Psychological Association; National Association of Social Workers; Leadership Conference Education Fund; Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; Historians of Antigay Discrimination; 24 Employers; Gary J. Gates; PROMO; Constitutional Law Scholars; Janet Jorgensen; Cynthia Phillips; Historians of Marriage; Legal Scholars; Chris Coleman, Mayor; Kyle Dorian, Mayor; Sly James, Mayor; Peter Lindstrom, Mayor; Francis Slay, Mayor; Shelley Welsch, Mayor

Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s)

Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention; National Association of Evangelicals; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints; The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod; The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; Alliance Defending Freedom; Missouri Family Policy Council; Missouri Legislative Leadership; Liberty Counsel; 114 Scholars of Marriage

Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s)

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

22/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket

12/10/2014

Civil case docketed. [4224599] [14-3779, 14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 12/10/2014 03:08 PM]

3 pg, 85.06 KB

12/10/2014

37 pg, 870.33 KB

MOTION to vacate stay or for an expedited appeal, filed by Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 12/10/2014. [4224617] [14-3779, 14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 12/10/2014 03:27 PM]

12/10/2014

Originating court document filed consisting of order andjudgment filed 11/7/14, notice of cross-appeal,

55 pg, 494.95 KB docket entries, [4224633] [14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 12/10/2014 03:40 PM]

12/11/2014

APPEARANCE filed by Jay D. Haden for Appellee Robert T. Kelly w/service 12/11/2014 [4224940] [143780] Atty Haden will refile form--[Edited 12/11/2014 by SRD] (JDH) [Entered: 12/11/2014 11:42 AM]

12/11/2014

APPEARANCE filed by Jay D. Haden for Appellee Robert T. Kelly w/service 12/11/2014 [4225010] [14-

1 pg, 20.78 KB 3780] (JDH) [Entered: 12/11/2014 01:14 PM]

12/20/2014
2 pg, 160.92 KB

LETTER from Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 regarding advising of Armstrong v. Brenner, No. 14A650, 2014 WL 7210190 (U.S. Dec. 19, 2014), as it relates to the pending motion to vacate stay. w/service 12/20/2014 [4228125] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 12/20/2014 10:59 AM]

12/29/2014

METHOD of appendix preparation filed by Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779 - Separate Appendix

2 pg, 70.07 KB w/service 12/29/2014 [4229854] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 12/29/2014 02:57 PM]

12/29/2014

Certificate of transcript filed by Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779. No Transcript [4229858] [14-3779,

2 pg, 69.38 KB 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 12/29/2014 02:59 PM]

01/09/2015

LETTER from Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779

2 pg, 164.95 KB regarding motion to vacate stay or, in the alternate, expedite appeal. w/service 01/09/2015 [4233136] [14-

3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 01/09/2015 01:52 PM]

01/21/2015
4 pg, 76.9 KB

MOTION for stay, filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779 w/service 01/21/2015. [4236132] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 01/21/2015 10:31 AM]

01/21/2015
3 pg, 71.39 KB

RESPONSE in opposition to motion for stay [4236132-2] filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 , w/service 01/21/2015. [4236144] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 01/21/2015 10:55 AM]

01/22/2015
2 pg, 76.11 KB

JUDGE ORDER: Appellees' motion to vacate the district court's stay has been considered by the court, and the motion is denied. The State of Missouri's motion to stay the appeal is also denied. It is further ordered that the appellees' alternative motion to expedite the appeal is granted, and the following briefing schedule is established: Appellant's Brief and Appendix due 02/17/2015. Appellees/cross-appellants'' brief due 30 days from the date the court issues the notice of docket activity for the filing of appellant's brief. See order for further details. Adp Jan 2015 [4236892] [14-3779, 14-3780] (PSA) [Entered: 01/22/2015 03:13 PM]

02/05/2015
2 pg, 223.12 KB

LETTER from Appellant State of Missouri, Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon McGinty and Not Party Robert T. Kelly in 14-3779, Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon McGinty and Appellees Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 14-3780 regarding notifying Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a) that all parties to these appeals consent to the filing of any amicus briefs in this case. w/service 02/05/2015 [4241958] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 02/05/2015 03:40 PM]

02/09/2015

MOTION vacate district court's stay of its November 7, 2014 judgment, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E.

5 pg, 246.39 KB Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779

w/service 02/09/2015. [4242668] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 02/09/2015 11:28 AM]

02/18/2015

PUBLIC DOCKET NOTE: The appellant brief of the State of Missouri was filed in the lead case, 14-3779 on 02/18/2015. [14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 09:18 AM]

02/23/2015
58 pg, 411.9 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, National Association of Evangelicals, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 14-3779, 143780 w/service 02/23/2015 , Length: 6,993 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Amici Curiae due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247131] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/23/2015 04:33 PM]

02/24/2015

MOTION interested party, Liberty Counsel , for leave to file amicus curiae brief on behalf of Appellants State of Missouri, et al. w/service 02/24/2015. [4247444] [14-3779, 14-3780]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

23/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
THIS DOCUMENT IS THE BRIEF SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW by amicus curiae, Liberty Counsel--[Edited 02/24/2015 by SRD] (MEM) [Entered: 02/24/2015 12:49 PM]

02/24/2015

40 pg, 108.94 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Alliance Defending Freedom in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/24/2015 , Length: 6,718 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Alliance Defending Freedom due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247561] [14-3779, 14-3780] [4247561] [14-3779, 14-3780]--[Edited to show brief filed in 14-3780 02/25/2015 by AMT] (AMT) [Entered: 02/24/2015 02:44 PM]

02/24/2015

35 pg, 104.58 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Missouri Family Policy Council in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/24/2015 , Length: 5,080 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Missouri Family Policy Council due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247607] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/24/2015 03:21 PM]

02/24/2015

43 pg, 179.57 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/24/2015 , Length: 6,966 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Missouri Legislative Leadership due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4247664] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/24/2015 04:30 PM]

02/24/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Liberty Counsel in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/25/2015 , Length: 6,995 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Liberty Counsel due 03/02/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs THIS BRIEF HAS BEEN REPLACED BY THE CORRECTED BRIEF FILED ON 02/26/2015 [4247862] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/25/2015 10:36 AM]

02/26/2015

38 pg, 526.48 KB

BRIEF FILED - CORRECTED Amicus Brief - correcting doc # [4247862-2]. w/service 02/26/2015 , Length: 6,995 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Liberty Counsel due 03/03/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4248226] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 08:17 AM]

02/26/2015

68 pg, 423.99 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICI BRIEF filed by 114 Scholars of Marriage in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 02/26/2015 , Length: 6,976 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM 114 Scholars of Marriage due 03/03/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4248624] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 02:51 PM]

02/26/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247131-2] filed by Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, National Association of Evangelicals, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. w/Addendum attached [4248747] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 04:28 PM]

02/26/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247607-2] filed by Missouri Family Policy Council in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4248753] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 02/26/2015 04:34 PM]

02/26/2015

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4248753-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of

2 pg, 197.02 KB Appellant(s) Missouri Family Policy Council in 14-3779 [4248774] [14-3779, 14-3780] (MIS) [Entered:

02/26/2015 05:19 PM]

02/27/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247664-2] filed by Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249756] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:26 PM]

02/27/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4247561-2] filed by Alliance Defending Freedom in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249769] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:41 PM]

03/02/2015

Paper copies Corrected Amicus brief, [4248226-2] filed by Liberty Counsel in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249775] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:51 PM]

03/02/2015

Paper copies Amici Brief with attached Appendix, [4248624-2] filed by 114 Scholars of Marriage in 143779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4249781] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/02/2015 03:57 PM]

03/02/2015
2 pg, 11.61 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4249775-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Liberty Counsel in 14-3779 [4249823] [14-3779, 14-3780] (MEM) [Entered: 03/02/2015 05:04 PM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

24/33

2/11/2019
03/02/2015
3 pg, 13.01 KB

14-3780 Docket
CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4247561-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Alliance Defending Freedom in 14-3779 [4249828] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JAC) [Entered: 03/02/2015 05:21 PM]

03/02/2015
1 pg, 41.87 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4249756-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779 [4249832] [14-3779, 14-3780] (MKW) [Entered: 03/02/2015 05:24 PM]

03/03/2015
1 pg, 76.24 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4248624-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) 114 Scholars of Marriage in 14-3779 [4250127] [14-3779, 14-3780] (GCS) [Entered: 03/03/2015 12:50 PM]

03/04/2015

RECORD FILED - APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE APPENDIX, 2 volumes, Comments: 3 copies, Source Location: St. Louis [4250980] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/05/2015 09:21 AM]

03/13/2015
4 pg, 306.2 KB

MOTION to file an overlength brief of 15,400 words, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 03/13/2015. [4254418] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/13/2015 04:51 PM]

03/16/2015

LETTER from Appellee Kyle Lawson in 14-3779 regarding notifying court that State of Missouri has

1 pg, 153.72 KB indicated its consent to the relief requested by Appellees' motion for leave to file an overlength brief.

w/service 03/16/2015 [4254449] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/16/2015 12:30 AM]

03/16/2015
2 pg, 6.63 KB

CLERK ORDER:Granting [4254418-2] motion to file an overlength brief filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert. in 14-3779 Motion to file brief in excess of limits set forth in FRAP Rule 32 (a)(A) and (B) is granted. Brief of no more than 15,400 words may be filed. [4254749] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/16/2015 01:57 PM]

03/19/2015
2 pg, 6.83 KB

JUDGE ORDER:[4242668-2] Adp Mar 2015 [4256450] [14-3779, 14-3780] Consistent with the status of the other cases set for argument on May 12, 2015, the second motion to vacate stay is denied. (SRD) [Entered: 03/19/2015 03:06 PM]

03/20/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

APPELLEE brief of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 143780 submitted for review. The time for filing the subsequent brief does not begin to run until the brief has been approved and filed. [4257018] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/20/2015 05:39 PM]

03/23/2015
79 pg, 733.1 KB

BRIEF FILED - BRIEF APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 14-3780. w/service 03/23/2015 , Length: 14,355 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Appellees/Cross-Appellants due 03/30/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs . Third brief of State of Missouri and Robert T. Kelly brief due on 04/06/2015. [4257037] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/23/2015 08:19 AM]

03/24/2015

Paper copies Second Brief, [4257037-2] filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4257929] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/24/2015 03:14 PM]

03/25/2015
4 pg, 193.18 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Second Brief, Doc No. [4257037-2], filed by Appellees Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 [4258320] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 03/25/2015 01:40 PM]

03/26/2015

37 pg, 111.09 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICI BRIEF filed by American Military Partner Association and OutServe-Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/26/2015 , Length: 6,913 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM American Military Partner Association and OutServeSevicemembers Legal Defense Network due 03/31/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4258800] [14-3779, 14-3780] --[Edited to show brief filed in Case No. 14-3780 03/26/2015 by AMT] (AMT) [Entered: 03/26/2015 01:45 PM]

03/26/2015
44 pg, 353.9 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/26/2015 , Length: 6,979 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic due 03/31/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4258811] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/26/2015 01:56 PM]

03/26/2015

46 pg, 141.55 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by American Sociological Association in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/26/2015 , Length: 6,545 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM American Sociological Association due 03/31/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4258853] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/26/2015 02:58 PM]

03/26/2015

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for

50 pg, 209.23 KB Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ,

Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity,

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

25/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,442 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259594] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 10:26 AM]

03/26/2015
46 pg, 231.6 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by COLAGE and Family Equality Council in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,829 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM COLAGE and Family Equality Council due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259607] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 10:40 AM]

03/26/2015

51 pg, 238.07 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,905 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Americans United For Separation of Church and State due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259628] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 11:02 AM]

03/26/2015

46 pg, 125.02 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Arkansas Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers and National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,997 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Arkansas Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers and National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259673] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 11:34 AM]

03/26/2015

50 pg, 226.59 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 5,908 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259692] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 11:54 AM]

03/27/2015

50 pg, 417.84 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Historians of Antigay Discrimination in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,986 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Historians of Antigay Discrimination due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259744] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:05 PM]

03/27/2015

53 pg, 244.78 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by 24 Employers in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,954 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM 24 Employers due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs Individual employers named in brief. [4259756] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:21 PM]

03/27/2015
33 pg, 298.6 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Gary J. Gates in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 4,713 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Gary J. Gates due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259776] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:36 PM]

03/27/2015

47 pg, 324.88 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by PROMO in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 7,160 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM PROMO due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259801] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 01:58 PM]

03/30/2015

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Constitutional Law Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service

45 pg, 179.15 KB 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,968 words

10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Constitutional Law Scholars due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

26/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
of service for paper briefs Individual scholars named in brief. [4259489] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 08:15 AM]

03/30/2015

38 pg, 149.43 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/30/2015 , Length: 6,366 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4259902] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/30/2015 03:25 PM]

03/30/2015

41 pg, 122.99 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Historians of Marriage in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/31/2015 , Length: 5,606 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Historians of Marriage due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs Historians of Marriage individuals named within the brief. [4259999] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 07:57 AM]

03/30/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4258811-2] filed by Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic in 143779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260471] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 03:49 PM]

03/30/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259607-2], Amicus Brief, [4259226-2], Amicus Brief, [4259142-2] filed by COLAGE and Family Equality Council in 14-3779, 14-3780, 15-1022, 15-1186 10 paper copies received. 10 copies only approved by Clerk of Court. [4260506] [14-3779, 14-3780, 15-1022, 15-1186] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 04:28 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Michael A. Ponto for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 45.28 KB Phillips w/service 03/31/2015 [4260056] [14-3780] (MAP) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:15 AM]

03/31/2015
1 pg, 54.5 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Christiana M. Martenson for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips w/service 03/31/2015 [4260060] [14-3780] (CMM) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:18 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Christopher H. Dolan for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Janet Jorgensen and

1 pg, 45.35 KB Cynthia Phillips w/service 03/31/2015 [4260062] [14-3780] (CHD) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:20 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Emily E. Chow for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 49.71 KB Phillips w/service 03/31/2015 [4260064] [14-3780] (EEC) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:23 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Camilla B. Taylor for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 44.94 KB Phillips w/service 03/31/2015 [4260068] [14-3780] (CT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:25 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Kyle A. Palazzolo for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia

1 pg, 59.49 KB Phillips w/service 03/31/2015 [4260072] [14-3780] (KP) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:28 AM]

03/31/2015

50 pg, 336.14 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Legal Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/31/2015 , Length: 8,231 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Legal Scholars due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs The individual Legal Scholars are named within the brief. [4260075] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:32 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Carmine D. Boccuzzi, Jr. for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) American

1 pg, 12.49 KB Sociological Association w/service 03/31/2015 [4260094] [14-3780] (CDB) [Entered: 03/31/2015 09:47 AM]

03/31/2015
28 pg, 69.8 KB

BRIEF FILED - AMICUS BRIEF filed by Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3779, 14-3780 w/service 03/31/2015 , Length: 3,323 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM Chris Coleman, et al due 04/06/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4260120] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 03/31/2015 10:19 AM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Shane K. Blank for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) PROMO w/service

1 pg, 47.04 KB 03/31/2015 [4260260] [14-3780] (SKB) [Entered: 03/31/2015 01:11 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Pratik A. Shah for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Historians of Marriage

10 pg, 57.51 KB w/service 03/31/2015 [4260264] [14-3780] (PAS) [Entered: 03/31/2015 01:14 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Jessica M. Weisel for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Historians of Marriage

10 pg, 57.53 KB w/service 03/15/2015 [4260277] [14-3780] (JW) [Entered: 03/31/2015 01:22 PM]

03/31/2015
1 pg, 12.33 KB

APPEARANCE filed by Charles Rothfeld for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Americans United For Separation of Church and State w/service 03/31/2015 [4260302] [14-3780] (CAR) [Entered: 03/31/2015 01:40 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Susan Baker Manning for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) 24 Employers

1 pg, 14.52 KB w/service 03/31/2015 [4260422] [14-3780] (SBM) [Entered: 03/31/2015 03:09 PM]

03/31/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Benjamin G. Shatz for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Gary J. Gates w/service

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

27/33

2/11/2019

1 pg, 19.57 KB

14-3780 Docket
03/31/2015 [4260460] [14-3780] (BGS) [Entered: 03/31/2015 03:40 PM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4258800-2] filed by American Military Partner Association and OutServeSevicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260578] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 08:20 AM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259673-2] filed by American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Arkansas Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers and National Association of Social Workers Missouri, Arkansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska Chapters in 14-3779, 143780 10 paper copies received. [4260600] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 09:06 AM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259692-2] filed by Leadership Conference Education Fund and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260866] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:13 PM]

03/31/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259801-2] filed by PROMO in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260869] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:15 PM]

04/01/2015

APPEARANCE filed by J. Michael Bridges for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian,

1 pg, 110.74 KB Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch w/service 04/01/2015 [4260621] [14-3780]

(JMB) [Entered: 04/01/2015 09:43 AM]

04/01/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4258853-2] filed by American Sociological Association in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4260872] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:17 PM]

04/01/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259999-2] filed by Historians of Marriage in 14-3779, 14-3780 11 paper copies received. [4260875] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/01/2015 02:19 PM]

04/01/2015
3 pg, 18.24 KB

MOTION to withdraw as retained counsel, filed by Attorney Mr. Grant R Doty for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 04/01/2015. [4260954] [143779, 14-3780] (GRD) [Entered: 04/01/2015 03:53 PM]

04/02/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Diane M. Soubly for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Constitutional Law Scholars

1 pg, 15.43 KB w/service 03/31/2015 [4261029] [14-3780] (DMS) [Entered: 04/02/2015 07:10 AM]

04/02/2015
3 pg, 9.42 KB

CLERK ORDER: Granting [4260954-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Grant R Doty. in 14-3779 Mr. Grant R Doty for Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, 143780 has been granted leave to withdraw from these cases. [4261047] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/02/2015 08:36 AM]

04/02/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259756-2] filed by 24 Employers in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4261255] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/02/2015 11:58 AM]

04/02/2015
5 pg, 13.46 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4258800-2], filed by Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) American Military Partner Association and OutServe-Sevicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3779, Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) American Military Partner Association and OutServeServicemembers Legal Defense Network in 14-3780 [4261316] [14-3779, 14-3780] (CDM) [Entered: 04/02/2015 01:16 PM]

04/02/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259628-2] filed by Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4261359] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/02/2015 02:06 PM]

04/02/2015
8 pg, 58.37 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4259756-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) 24 Employers in 14-3779 [4261569] [14-3779, 14-3780] (SBM) [Entered: 04/02/2015 05:56 PM]

04/03/2015

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4260869-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of

9 pg, 204.98 KB Appellee(s) PROMO in 14-3779 [4261666] [14-3779, 14-3780] (SKB) [Entered: 04/03/2015 09:50 AM]

04/03/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259902-2] filed by Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4261772] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/03/2015 11:14 AM]

04/03/2015
5 pg, 25.71 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4261772-2], filed by Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Janet Jorgensen and Cynthia Phillips in 14-3779 [4261838] [14-3779, 14-3780] (EEC) [Entered: 04/03/2015 12:18 PM]

04/03/2015

CORRECTED certificate of service for Paper Brief , Doc No. [4260875-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of

10 pg, 38.42 KB Appellee(s) Historians of Marriage in 14-3779, Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Historians of Marriage in

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

28/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
14-3780 [4261926] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JW) [Entered: 04/03/2015 03:01 PM]

04/03/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4260120-2] filed by Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262148] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 09:29 AM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259744-2] filed by Historians of Antigay Discrimination in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262311] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:20 PM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4260075-2] filed by Legal Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262317] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:25 PM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259489-2] filed by Constitutional Law Scholars in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262343] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:52 PM]

04/06/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259776-2] filed by Gary J. Gates in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4262348] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/06/2015 02:58 PM]

04/06/2015
0 pg, 0 KB

THIRD brief of State of Missouri in 14-3779, 14-3780 submitted for review. The time for filing the subsequent brief does not begin to run until the brief has been approved and filed. [4262370] [14-3779, 143780] (JJM) [Entered: 04/06/2015 03:35 PM]

04/06/2015

APPEARANCE filed by Joseph P. Lombardo for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Legal Scholars w/service

3 pg, 108.77 KB 04/06/2015 [4262385] [14-3780] (JPL) [Entered: 04/06/2015 04:05 PM]

04/08/2015
1 pg, 64.66 KB

LETTER from Appellee Robert T. Kelly in 14-3780 notifying the Court they will not be filing a brief in this case - - FOR CAL. w/service 04/07/2015 [4263053] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JDH) [Entered: 04/08/2015 10:57 AM]

04/08/2015

22 pg, 180.78 KB

BRIEF FILED - REPLY APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE filed by State of Missouri in 14-3779, 14-3780, w/service 04/08/2015 , Length: 1,681 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS FROM State of Missouri due 04/13/2015 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs . Fourth brief of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty due 04/15/2015 [4263060] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/08/2015 11:07 AM]

04/08/2015

LETTER from Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780

1 pg, 153.97 KB notifying the Court they will not be filing a brief in this case - - FOR CAL. w/service 04/08/2015 [4263236]

[14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/08/2015 02:14 PM]

04/08/2015

SET FOR ARGUMENT - CASE PLACED ON CALENDAR - for Argument in Omaha on Tuesday, May 12, 2015. To be heard before Judges Roger L. Wollman, Lavenski R. Smith and Duane Benton in Division I. The courtroom deputy will be Lorri Brown. All attorneys presenting oral argument must complete a Response Form. The Response Form may be found at http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/newcoa/forms/OralArgumentResponseForm.pdf. For the complete calendar go to http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/webcal/may15omh.pdf PLEASE REVIEW THE ENTIRE CALENDAR CAREFULLY, PARTICULARLY THE COUNSEL NOTICE PAGE. If you are appointed counsel under the Criminal Justice Act and require airline transportation to oral argument, the court will issue a travel authorization the next business day. [4263334] [14-3779, 14-3780] (TAB) [Entered: 04/08/2015 03:29 PM]

04/09/2015
3 pg, 67.37 KB

MOTION to withdraw as retained counsel, filed by Attorney Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck for Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck for Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3780 w/service 04/09/2015. [4263674] [14-3779, 14-3780] (SMN) [Entered: 04/09/2015 11:34 AM]

04/09/2015
2 pg, 6.7 KB

CLERK ORDER:Granting [4263674-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck in 14-3779, 14-3780. Mr. Scott Matthew Noveck for Americans United For Separation of Church and State in 14-3779, 14-3780 has been granted leave to withdraw from these cases. [4263720] [14-3779, 14-3780] -[Edited 04/09/2015 by AMT] (AMT) [Entered: 04/09/2015 01:01 PM]

04/09/2015

Paper copies Amicus Brief, [4259594-2] filed by President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska et al. in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4263731] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/09/2015 01:21 PM]

04/10/2015
3 pg, 238.48 KB

MOTION to split argument time, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellants Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780 w/service 04/10/2015. [4263952] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/10/2015 07:15 AM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

29/33

2/11/2019
04/10/2015
2 pg, 10.04 KB
04/10/2015 04/13/2015
2 pg, 27.51 KB
04/13/2015
04/13/2015
04/13/2015
2 pg, 33.84 KB
04/13/2015
2 pg, 36.15 KB
04/13/2015
2 pg, 36.14 KB
04/13/2015
2 pg, 36.15 KB

14-3780 Docket
JUDGE ORDER:Granting [4263952-2] motion split argument time filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert. Hrg May 2015 [4264237] [14-3779, 14-3780] (KAS) [Entered: 04/10/2015 01:51 PM]
Paper copies Third Brief, [4263060-2] filed by State of Missouri in 14-3779, 14-3780 10 paper copies received. [4264507] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/13/2015 11:13 AM]
APPEARANCE filed by Jeffrey S. Trachtman for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264859] [14-3780] (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 04:48 PM]
APPEARANCE filed by Michelle Ben-David for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264861] [14-3780]--[Edited 04/13/2015 by YML]"Counsel will refile listing the correct case number." (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 04:51 PM]
APPEARANCE filed by Jeffrey S. Trachtman for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264865] [14-3780]--[Edited 04/13/2015 by YML]"Counsel will refile listing the correct case number." (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 05:02 PM]
APPEARANCE filed by Catherine Hoge for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264867] [14-3780] (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 05:04 PM]
APPEARANCE filed by Jason M. Moff for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, National Association of Social Workers, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264872] [14-3780] (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 05:10 PM]
APPEARANCE filed by Kurt M. Denk for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264873] [14-3780] (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 05:12 PM]
APPEARANCE filed by Norman C. Simon for Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Affirmation, Covenant Network of Presbyterians, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns, General Synod of the United Church of Christ, Methodist Federation for Social Action, More Light Presbyterians, Muslims for Progressive Values, Parity, President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Bishops of Missouri and Nebraska, Reconciling Ministries Network, Reconciling Works: Lutherans for Full Participation, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and Jewish Reconstructionist Communities, Religious Institute, Union for Reform Judaism and

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

30/33

2/11/2019

14-3780 Docket
Unitarian Universalist Association w/service 04/13/2015 [4264874] [14-3780] (JST) [Entered: 04/13/2015 05:14 PM]

04/14/2015

ARGUMENT RESPONSE/APPEARANCE FORM filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Kyle Lawson, Evan

1 pg, 196.08 KB Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 for argument in May, at the U.S. Courthouse in

Omaha, Nebraska. [4265051] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/14/2015 11:15 AM]

04/14/2015
1 pg, 62.22 KB

ARGUMENT RESPONSE/APPEARANCE FORM filed by Mr. Joshua A. Block for Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 for argument in May, at the U.S. Courthouse in Omaha, Nebraska. [4265132] [14-3780, 14-3779] (JAB) [Entered: 04/14/2015 01:10 PM]

04/14/2015
4 pg, 12.68 KB

CORRECTED certificate of service for brief Amicus Brief, Doc No. [4259744-2], filed by Amicus on Behalf of Appellee(s) Historians of Antigay Discrimination in 14-3779 [4265373] [14-3779, 14-3780] (CES) [Entered: 04/14/2015 05:04 PM]

04/16/2015

Mail sent to Attorney Brad Seiling for Amici on Behalf of Appellees/Cross-Appellants Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic and Gary J. Gates in 14-3779, 14-3780 on 03/26/2015 was returned on 04/16/2015 Reason Mail Returned: Return to Sender. Not Deliverable as Addressedd. Unable to Forward. Resent letter to counsel's corrected address on 04/16/2016. [4266129] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 04/16/2015 03:48 PM]

04/17/2015
1 pg, 75.76 KB

ARGUMENT RESPONSE/APPEARANCE FORM filed by Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for State of Missouri in 14-3779, Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 14-3780 for argument in May, at the U.S. Courthouse in Omaha, Nebraska. [4266301] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 04/17/2015 11:29 AM]

04/21/2015

CLERK LETTER sent regarding attendance at oral argument. [4267306] [14-3779, 14-3780, 15-1022, 15-

1 pg, 32.89 KB 1186, 15-1452] (SRD) [Entered: 04/21/2015 02:34 PM]

04/23/2015

LETTER from Appellants Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson and Shannon McGinty in 14-3780

1 pg, 150.49 KB regarding estimate of the number of lawyers and parties attending oral argument. w/service 04/23/2015

[4268313] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 04/23/2015 03:14 PM]

04/24/2015
1 pg, 25.01 KB

LETTER from Amici on Behalf of Appellee(s) Chris Coleman, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3779, Amici on Behalf of Appellant(s) Chris Coleman, Kyle Dorian, Sly James, Peter Lindstrom, Francis Slay and Shelley Welsch in 14-3780 regarding Oral Argument attendance. w/service 04/24/2015 [4268665] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JMB) [Entered: 04/24/2015 12:37 PM]

04/27/2015

LETTER from Amicus on Behalf of Appellant(s) Missouri Legislative Leadership in 14-3779 regarding

1 pg, 181.69 KB Attendance at the Oral Argument to be held on May 12, 2015.. w/service 04/27/2015 [4269104] [14-3779,

14-3780] (MKW) [Entered: 04/27/2015 11:46 AM]

04/29/2015

LETTER from Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779, Appellee State of Missouri in 14-3780 regarding

1 pg, 119.28 KB attendance at Oral Argument. w/service 04/29/2015 [4270124] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered:

04/29/2015 12:40 PM]

04/29/2015
2 pg, 10.23 KB

JUDGE ORDER: On the court's own motion, oral arguments and any further consideration of these cases will be deferred pending the Supreme Court of the United States' decisions in Nos. 14-556, 14-562, 14571, and 14-574 James Obergefell, et al. v. Richard Hodges, etc., et al. Hrg May 2015 [4270144] [14-3779, 14-3780] (KAS) [Entered: 04/29/2015 01:09 PM]

06/26/2015

MOTION vacate district court's stay of judgment, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for Appellees

6 pg, 415.05 KB Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service 06/26/2015.

[4289068] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 06/26/2015 09:11 AM]

06/26/2015
3 pg, 69.86 KB

MOTION to dismiss case, filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellees Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 143780 w/service 06/26/2015. [4289155] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 06/26/2015 10:45 AM]

06/30/2015

RESPONSE with no opposition to motion to dismiss case [4289155-2] filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E.

3 pg, 226.81 KB Rothert for Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 ,

w/service 06/30/2015. [4290546] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 06/30/2015 02:41 PM]

07/01/2015
3 pg, 17.89 KB

JUDGMENT FILED - The State of Missouri's motion to dismiss its appeal in No. 14-3779 is granted. Appellees/Cross-Appellants' motion to dismiss their cross-appeal in No. 14-3880 is also granted. Appellees/Cross-Appellants' motion to vacate the district court's stay order is denied as moot. The court's mandate shall issue forthwith. [4289155-2], [4289068-2].. ROGER L. WOLLMAN, LAVENSKI R. SMITH and DUANE BENTON Hrg May 2015 [4291146] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 07/01/2015 04:18 PM]

07/01/2015
2 pg, 9.99 KB

MANDATE ISSUED. [4291161] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 07/01/2015 04:32 PM]

07/15/2015

MOTION for attorney fees in the amount of 27883.50, filed by Attorney Mr. Anthony E. Rothert for

50 pg, 6.56 MB Appellees Kyle Lawson, Evan Dahlgren, Angela Curtis and Shannon McGinty in 14-3779 w/service

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

31/33

2/11/2019
07/22/2015
3 pg, 72.79 KB
07/24/2015
2 pg, 10.17 KB

14-3780 Docket
07/15/2015. [4295767] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AER) [Entered: 07/15/2015 08:58 PM]
RESPONSE motion for attorney fees [4295767-2] filed by Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellant State of Missouri in 14-3779, Attorney Mr. Jeremiah J. Morgan, Sr. for Appellees Robert T. Kelly and State of Missouri in 14-3780 , w/service 07/22/2015. [4297869] [14-3779, 14-3780] (JJM) [Entered: 07/22/2015 10:31 AM]
JUDGE ORDER:Granting [4295767-2] motion for attorney fees filed by Mr. Anthony E. Rothert. in 14-3779 Amount of fees granted $27,883.50 (Twenty-seven thousand eight hundred eighty-three dollars and fifty cents). Hrg May 2015 [4298684] [14-3779, 14-3780] (AMT) [Entered: 07/24/2015 08:51 AM]

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

32/33

2/11/2019
Clear All

14-3780 Docket

Documents and Docket Summary Documents Only

Include Page Numbers

elected Pages: 0

Selected Size: KB

(Max: 10 MB)

otals reflect accessible documents only and do not include unauthorized restricted documents.

View Selected

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

8th Circuit Court of Appeals - 02/11/2019 09:39:31

PACER Login:

CRClearinghouse

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report (filtered)

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 20

Cost:

14-3780 2.00

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom

33/33

 
 MAPADMIN,PHV
U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri (Kansas City) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:14−cv−00622−ODS

Lawson et al v. Kelly Assigned to: District Judge Ortrie D. Smith Case in other court: 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, 14−03779
8th Circuit Court of Appeals, 14−03780
Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, 1416−CV15024 Cause: 28:1441 Petition for Removal
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 07/15/2014 Date Terminated: 11/07/2014 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 950 Constitutional − State Statute Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Kyle Lawson

represented by Andrew McNulty American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation−StL 454 Whittier Street St. Louis, MO 63108 314−669−3418 Email: amcnulty@aclu−mo.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Anthony E. Rothert American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation−StL 906 Olive Street Suite 1130 St. Louis, MO 63101 (314) 652−3114 Fax: (314) 652−3112 Email: trothert@aclu−mo.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gillian R. Wilcox American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation−KCMO 406 W. 34th Street Suite 420 Kansas City, MO 64111 816−470−9938 Fax: 314−652−3112 Email: gwilcox@aclu−mo.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Grant R. Doty United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission − Stl 1222 Spruce Street Room 8.100 St. Louis, MO 63103 314−539−7918 Fax: 314−539−7895 Email: grant.doty@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Joshua A Block American Civil Liberties Union

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 1 of 9

Foundation 125 Broad Street 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 (212) 549−2593 Fax: (212) 549−2650 Email: jblock@aclu.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Evan Dahlgren

represented by Andrew McNulty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Anthony E. Rothert (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gillian R. Wilcox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Grant R. Doty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Joshua A Block (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Angela Curtis

represented by Andrew McNulty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Anthony E. Rothert (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gillian R. Wilcox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Grant R. Doty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-622

Joshua A Block (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 2 of 9

Plaintiff Shannon L McGinty

represented by Andrew McNulty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Anthony E. Rothert (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Gillian R. Wilcox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Grant R. Doty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joshua A Block (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Robert T Kelly in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of Deeds
Amicus Missouri Family Policy Council Amicus Curiae Missouri Family Policy Council

represented by Jay Haden Jackson County Counselor's Office 415 East 12th Street Suite 200 Kansas City, MO 64106 816−881−3355 Fax: 816/881−3398 Email: jhaden@jacksongov.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeremiah J. Morgan Missouri Supreme Court P.O. Box 150 Jefferson City, MO 65102 573−751−4030 Fax: 573−751−7514 Email: jeremiah.morgan@courts.mo.gov (Inactive) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Marsha I Stiles 1801 W. Norton Road Suite 202 Springfield, MO 65803 417/833−9394 Fax: 417/708−8963 Email: stileslegal@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 3 of 9

V. Intervenor State of Missouri

represented by Jeremiah J. Morgan (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/15/2014
07/15/2014 07/15/2014
07/16/2014
07/22/2014 07/22/2014 08/05/2014 08/05/2014 08/12/2014 08/12/2014 08/20/2014

# Docket Text
1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri County, case number 1416−cv15024, State of Missouri. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0866−4018798.(Morgan, Jeremiah) (Main Document 1 replaced on 7/16/2014) (Houston, Kiambu). (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/16/2014: # 1 State Court Petition, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Civil Cover Sheet) (Houston, Kiambu). (Entered: 07/15/2014)
2 ANSWER to Complaint on behalf of State of Missouri.(Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 07/15/2014)
3 NOTICE of appearance by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty (Attorney Anthony E. Rothert added to party Angela Curtis(pty:pla), Attorney Anthony E. Rothert added to party Evan Dahlgren(pty:pla), Attorney Anthony E. Rothert added to party Kyle Lawson(pty:pla), Attorney Anthony E. Rothert added to party Shannon L McGinty(pty:pla))(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 07/15/2014)
4 NEW NOTICE OF INCLUSION FOR MEDIATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (MAP). REVIEW NEW NOTICE AND NEW MAP GENERAL ORDER CAREFULLY FOR IMPORTANT CHANGES, DEADLINES AND REQUIREMENTS.
Notice of MAP assignment to Program Director. (Attachments: # 1 MAP General Order)(Houston, Kiambu) (Entered: 07/16/2014)
5 Defendant Kelly's ANSWER to Complaint Plaintiff's Petition for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief on behalf of Robert T Kelly.(Attorney Jay Haden added to party Robert T Kelly(pty:dft))(Haden, Jay) (Entered: 07/22/2014)
6 Rule 16 Notice. Proposed scheduling order due by 10/14/2014. Rule 26 conference due by 9/30/2014. Signed on 7/22/2014 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Hopkins, Karen) (Entered: 07/22/2014)
7 MOTION for judgment on the pleadings filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of State of Missouri. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 8/22/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/05/2014)
8 SUGGESTIONS in support re 7 MOTION for judgment on the pleadings filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of Intervenor State of Missouri. (Related document(s) 7 ) (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/05/2014)
9 MOTION to remand filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 8/29/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/12/2014)
10 SUGGESTIONS in support re 9 MOTION to remand filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. 1, # 2 Exhibit Ex. 2)(Related document(s) 9 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/12/2014)
11 MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to 7 MOTION for judgment on the pleadings filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of All Plaintiffs. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/8/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 7 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/20/2014)

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 4 of 9

08/20/2014

12 ORDER granting 11 motion for extension of time to file response/reply. Plaintiffs shall file their response to Intervenor's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on or before September 5, 2014. Signed on 8/20/2014 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Hoberock, Meredith) (Entered: 08/20/2014)

08/20/2014

13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Robert T Kelly for Defendant's Answer to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories filed by Jay Haden on behalf of Defendant Robert T Kelly.(Haden, Jay) (Entered: 08/20/2014)

08/20/2014 14 NOTICE of filing DEFENDANT KELLYS CONFIRMATION OF CONSENT TO REMOVAL by Robert T Kelly (Haden, Jay) (Entered: 08/20/2014)

08/20/2014

15 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by State of Missouri for Defendant/Intervenor's Answer to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of Intervenor State of Missouri.(Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/20/2014)

08/28/2014

16 SUGGESTIONS in opposition re 9 MOTION to remand filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of Intervenor State of Missouri. Reply suggestions due by 9/15/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court (Related document(s) 9 ) (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/28/2014)

09/05/2014

17 MOTION for leave to file excess pages filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/22/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 proposed suggestions in opposition to missouri's motion for judgment on the pleadings)(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/05/2014)

09/05/2014

18 ORDER granting 17 motion for leave to file excess pages. Plaintiffs shall have three business days to electronically file their Suggestions in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed on 9/5/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 09/05/2014)

09/05/2014

19 SUGGESTIONS in opposition re 7 MOTION for judgment on the pleadings filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Reply suggestions due by 9/22/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court (Related document(s) 7 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/05/2014)

09/05/2014

20 MOTION for summary judgment filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of All Plaintiffs. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/29/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/05/2014)

09/05/2014

21 MOTION for leave to file excess pages filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of All Plaintiffs. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/22/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 proposed suggestions in support of motion for summary judgmnet, # 2 Exhibit Ex. A to suggestions in support of motion for summary judgment, # 3 Exhibit Ex. B to suggestions in support of motion for summary judgment, # 4 Exhibit Ex. C to suggestions in support of motion for summary judgment, # 5 Exhibit Ex. D to suggestions in support of motion for summary judgment, # 6 Exhibit Ex. E to suggestions in support of motion for summary judgment, # 7 Exhibit Ex. F to suggestions in support of motion for summary judgment)(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/05/2014)

09/09/2014

22 ORDER granting 21 motion for leave to file excess pages. Plaintiffs shall have three business days to electronically file the Suggestions in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment attached as an exhibit to this motion. Signed on 9/9/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 09/09/2014)

09/09/2014

23 SUGGESTIONS in support re 20 MOTION for summary judgment filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. A − Lawson Affidavit, # 2 Exhibit Ex. B − Dahlgren Affidavit, # 3 Exhibit Ex. C − Curtis Affidavit, # 4 Exhibit Ex. D − McGinty Affidavit, # 5 Exhibit Ex. E − Missouri Census Snapshot: 2010, # 6 Exhibit Ex. F − Kelly Response to Interrogatories)(Related document(s) 20 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/09/2014)

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 5 of 9

09/09/2014 09/10/2014 09/10/2014 09/11/2014 09/15/2014 09/15/2014 09/17/2014
09/19/2014 09/30/2014 10/02/2014 10/02/2014 10/02/2014 10/03/2014

24 Consent MOTION to stay re 6 Rule 16 Notice deadlines for filing of joint proposed scheduling order and Rule 26(f) conference until the Court rules on pending motions filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Kyle Lawson. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/26/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 6 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/09/2014)
25 ORDER granting 24 motion to vacate deadlines. The deadlines for conducting a Rule 26 Conference, exchanging Rule 26 information, and filing a Joint Proposed Scheduling Order are vacated. Signed on 9/10/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 09/10/2014)
26 Consent MOTION to withdraw document 9 MOTION to remand filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/29/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 9 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/10/2014)
27 ORDER granting 26 motion to withdraw document; withdrawing 9 motion to remand. Signed on 9/11/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 09/11/2014)
28 MOTION for permanent injunction filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/2/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/15/2014)
29 SUGGESTIONS in support re 28 MOTION for permanent injunction filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Related document(s) 28 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/15/2014)
30 SUGGESTIONS in opposition to motion for summary judgment re 28 MOTION for permanent injunction , 20 MOTION for summary judgment and in support of Intervenor's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Marsha I Stiles on behalf of Amicus Missouri Family Policy Council. Reply suggestions due by 10/6/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 28 , 20 ) (Attorney Marsha I Stiles added to party Missouri Family Policy Council(pty:am))(Stiles, Marsha) (Entered: 09/17/2014)
31 REPLY SUGGESTIONS to motion re 7 MOTION for judgment on the pleadings filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of Intervenor State of Missouri. (Related document(s) 7 ) (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 09/19/2014)
32 MOTION for extension of time filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of State of Missouri. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/17/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 09/30/2014)
33 RESPONSE to motion re 32 MOTION for extension of time (no opposition) filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Reply suggestions due by 10/20/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/02/2014)
34 ORDER granting 32 motion for extension of time.Suggestions in opposition/response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment due by 10/21/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. Signed on 10/2/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 10/02/2014)
35 MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to 28 MOTION for permanent injunction filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of State of Missouri. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/20/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 28 ) (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 10/02/2014)
36 ORDER finding as moot 35 motion for extension of time to file response/reply. Signed on 10/3/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 10/03/2014)

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 6 of 9

10/05/2014
10/09/2014
10/10/2014 10/14/2014 10/20/2014 10/20/2014
10/21/2014 10/21/2014
10/22/2014 10/22/2014 10/29/2014 11/02/2014 11/06/2014 11/07/2014

37 MOTION for order supplement authority re 7 MOTION for judgment on the pleadings filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/23/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement)(Related document(s) 7 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/05/2014)
38 MOTION for leave to file surreply to motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/27/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 proposed surreply)(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/09/2014)
39 ORDER (1) clarifying status of Missouri Family Policy Council and (2) granting 38 motion for leave to file surreply. Signed on 10/10/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 10/10/2014)
40 STIPULATION by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty, State of Missouri. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/14/2014)
41 Motion to allow Joshua Block to appear pro hac vice (Pro Hac fee $100 receipt number 0866−4128283) filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/20/2014)
42 ORDER granting 41 motion to appear pro hac vice approved by Clerk of Court. Attorney Joshua A Block for Angela Curtis,Joshua A Block for Evan Dahlgren,Joshua A Block for Kyle Lawson,Joshua A Block for Shannon L McGinty allowed to appear pro hac vice. This entry will serve as authorization for the pro hac participation by the attorney. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Martin, Jan) (Entered: 10/20/2014)
43 SUGGESTIONS in opposition to motion for summary judgment re 20 MOTION for summary judgment filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of Intervenor State of Missouri. Reply suggestions due by 11/7/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 20 ) (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 10/21/2014)
44 NOTICE of appearance by Andrew McNulty on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Attorney Andrew McNulty added to party Angela Curtis(pty:pla), Attorney Andrew McNulty added to party Evan Dahlgren(pty:pla), Attorney Andrew McNulty added to party Kyle Lawson(pty:pla), Attorney Andrew McNulty added to party Shannon L McGinty(pty:pla))(McNulty, Andrew) (Entered: 10/21/2014)
45 REPLY SUGGESTIONS to motion re 20 MOTION for summary judgment filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Related document(s) 20 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/22/2014)
46 MOTION to withdraw reference request for oral argument filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 11/10/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/22/2014)
47 ORDER granting 37 motion for leave to submit supplemental authority; granting 46 motion to withdraw request for oral argument. Signed on 10/29/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 10/29/2014)
48 SUPPLEMENT (notice of amended opinion and citation in Barrier v. Vasterling). (Related document(s) 20 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 11/02/2014)
49 NOTICE of filing Correspondence to Honorable Ortrie D. Smith by State of Missouri (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 11/06/2014)
50 ORDER AND OPINION (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS, (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (3) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 7 of 9

11/07/2014 11/12/2014
11/12/2014 11/18/2014 11/18/2014 11/18/2014
11/21/2014 11/25/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/08/2014 12/08/2014 12/08/2014 12/08/2014

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION, AND (4) STAYING EFFECT OF JUDGMENT PENDING COMPLETION OF APPEALS. (Re: 7 , 20 , and 28 ) Signed on 11/7/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Matthes, Renea) (Entered: 11/07/2014)
51 CLERK'S JUDGMENT (Matthes, Renea) (Entered: 11/07/2014)
52 Consent MOTION to stay deadlines for filing of motion for attorneys' fees and bill of costs pending completion of any appeals filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 12/1/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 11/12/2014)
53 ORDER denying 52 motion to stay; extending deadline for filing motion for attorney fees and bill of costs. Signed on 11/12/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 11/12/2014)
54 PROPOSED BILL OF COSTS by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty.Objections to Bill of Costs due by 12/5/2014 (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 11/18/2014)
55 MOTION for attorney fees filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 12/5/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 11/18/2014)
56 SUGGESTIONS in support re 55 MOTION for attorney fees filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. 1 − Affidavit of Anthony E. Rothert with attachments, # 2 Exhibit Ex. 2 − Affidavit of Grant R. Doty with attachment, # 3 Exhibit Ex. 3 − Affidavit of Gillian R. Wilcox with attachment)(Related document(s) 55 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 11/18/2014)
57 MOTION to lift stay without opposition by Defendant; with no position by Intervenor filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 12/8/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 11/21/2014)
58 ORDER denying 57 motion to lift stay. Signed on 11/25/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 11/25/2014)
59 SUGGESTIONS in opposition re 55 MOTION for attorney fees filed by Jeremiah J. Morgan on behalf of Intervenor State of Missouri. Reply suggestions due by 12/22/2014 unless otherwise directed by the court (Related document(s) 55 ) (Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 12/05/2014)
60 NOTICE OF APPEAL by State of Missouri. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0866−4182488. (Attachments: # 1 Order dated November 7, 2014, # 2 Judgment dated November 7, 2014)(Morgan, Jeremiah) (Entered: 12/05/2014)
61 TRANSMISSION of Notice of Appeal Supplement to US Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit via electronic mail. Related document 60 Notice of Appeal. (Crespo, Wil) (Entered: 12/08/2014)
62 REPLY SUGGESTIONS to motion re 55 MOTION for attorney fees filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. (Related document(s) 55 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 12/08/2014)
63 ORDER awarding Plaintiffs fees and costs and staying award pending conclusion of all appeals. Signed on 12/8/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Wolfe, Steve) (Entered: 12/08/2014)
64 NOTICE OF CROSS APPEAL as to 51 Clerk's Judgment, 50 Order on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, Order on Motion for Permanent Injunction,,, by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Kyle Lawson, Shannon L McGinty. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0866−4184669. (Attachments: # 1 Order on Cross−Motions, # 2 Judgment)(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 12/08/2014)

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 8 of 9

12/09/2014 12/10/2014 12/10/2014 12/15/2014 06/30/2015
07/01/2015
07/01/2015 07/02/2015

65 TRANSMISSION of Notice of Appeal Supplement to US Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit via electronic mail. Related document 64 Notice of Cross Appeal,. (Crespo, Wil) (Entered: 12/09/2014)
66 USCA Case Number from 8th Circuit Court of Appeals is 14−3779 for 60 Notice of Appeal filed by State of Missouri. (Crespo, Wil) (Entered: 12/10/2014)
67 USCA Case Number from 8th Circuit Court of Appeals is 14−3780 for 64 Notice of Cross Appeal, filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Shannon L McGinty, Kyle Lawson. (Crespo, Wil) (Entered: 12/10/2014)
68 AMENDED CLERK'S JUDGMENT (Matthes, Renea) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
69 Second MOTION to lift stay re 50 Order on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, Order on Motion for Permanent Injunction,,, filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of All Plaintiffs. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 7/17/2015 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit order of Eighth Circuit lifting its own stay in Waters v. rickets, # 2 Exhibit order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas lifting its stay in De Leon v. Perry)(Related document(s) 50 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 06/30/2015)
70 USCA Judgment as to 60 Notice of Appeal filed by State of Missouri, 64 Notice of Cross Appeal, filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Shannon L McGinty, Kyle Lawson This is a preliminary judgment of U.S. Court of Appeals; jurisdiction is not recovered until the Mandate is issued by the U.S Court of Appeals. The State of Missouri's motion to dismiss its appeal in No. 14−3779 is granted. Appellees/Cross−Appellants' motion to dismiss their cross−appeal in No. 14−3880 is also granted. (Crespo, Wil) (Entered: 07/01/2015)
71 MANDATE of US COURT OF APPEALS as to 60 Notice of Appeal filed by State of Missouri, 64 Notice of Cross Appeal, filed by Angela Curtis, Evan Dahlgren, Shannon L McGinty, Kyle Lawson with mandate issued on 7/1/15. (Crespo, Wil) (Entered: 07/01/2015)
72 ORDER granting 69 motion to lift stay. Signed on 7/2/2015 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Hopkins, Karen) (Entered: 07/02/2015)

Case: 4:14-cv-622 As of: 11/05/2017 02:44 PM CST 9 of 9