UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JACK D. DENTON,

Plaintiff,

Case No.: 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF

v.

JOHN E. THRASHER, President of

Florida State University, in his official 

and individual capacities, et al.,

Defendants.

/

MOTION TO DISSOLVE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5), Defendants, JOHN E. THRASHER, in 

his official capacity; AMY HECHT, in her official capacity; and BRANDON 

BOWDEN, in his official capacity (collectively, “FSU” or the “University”), move 

to dissolve this Court’s October 8, 2020 Order Granting in Part Plaintiff’s 

Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction and state as follows:

1. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on August 31, 2020 alleging that his First

Amendment rights were violated in connection with his removal from the position 

of student senate president of FSU’s Student Government Association.

Case 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF Document 66 Filed 01/25/21 Page 1 of 6
2

2. On September 4, 2020, Plaintiff moved for an emergency preliminary 

injunction asking this Court to, among other things, reinstate him to the student 

senate president position. (Doc. 13).

3. On October 8, 2020, the Court granted in part Plaintiff’s Emergency 

Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ordering that FSU pay Plaintiff the student senate 

president wage of $9.00 per hour for six hours of work per week for the remainder 

of the current term of the student senate president. 

4. As shown in Exhibits 1 and 2, Plaintiff has been fully compensated in 

accordance with the Court’s October 8, 2020 Order. (Exhibits 1 and 2). Accordingly, 

the full relief required by the Court’s October 8, 2020 Order is satisfied.

5. Having compensated Plaintiff $500.00 in full satisfaction of the Court’s 

October 8, 2020 Order, there is no further relief Plaintiff may hope to secure against 

the University. The only remaining issue for adjudication is the individual capacity 

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss asserting qualified immunity, which remains 

pending. (Doc. 43).1

6. Plaintiff’s counsel notified the undersigned that Plaintiff has graduated 

from the University. The 72nd student senate is adjourned. (See Exhibit 3)

 

1 Plaintiff has also moved for leave to amend the Complaint; however, for the reasons 

set forth in Defendants’ response to that motion amending the Complaint is 

precluded by the futility doctrine. (Doc. 63).

Case 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF Document 66 Filed 01/25/21 Page 2 of 6
3

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

At the outset of the litigation, Plaintiff moved for injunctive relief, which the 

Court awarded in part. The University fully complied with and satisfied its 

obligations under the October 8, 2020 Order and as the Court made clear in that 

Order, the remaining injunctive relief requested by Plaintiff against the University 

is not appropriate. Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief and alleged need for 

declaratory and injunctive relief is no longer a live issue.

The 72nd Student Senate – and, accordingly, the student senate president’s 

term - adjourned sine die on November 18, 2020.2 Plaintiff has been paid the student 

senate president’s hourly rate ($9.00) for six hours per week from October 16, 2020

to November 18, 2020. More specifically, Mr. Denton was issued a one time, lump 

sum payment in the amount of $500.00 for his services as student senate president. 

This amount covers the amount the University was required to pay. 

A district court has continuing jurisdiction over a preliminary injunction and 

may relieve a party from obligations determined by the decree if it is no longer 

equitable. Atlanta Journal and Constitution v. City of Atlanta Dept. of Aviation, 6 F. 

Supp 2d 1359, 1364 (N.D. Ga. 1998) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5); Canal 

Authority of Fla. v. Callaway, 489 F.2d 567, 578 (5th Cir.1954). Rule 60(b)(5) of 

 

2 See, Exhibit 3, Student Government Association Senate Minutes - November 18 

Meeting, https://sga.fsu.edu/minutes/SenateMinutes11_18_20.pdf. 

Case 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF Document 66 Filed 01/25/21 Page 3 of 6
4

the Federal Rule of Procedure states: “the court may relieve a party or its legal 

representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following 

reasons... the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged.” When moving

to dissolve a court’s order, the movant has the burden of proof. United States v. 

Harrison County, Miss., 463 F.2d 1328, 1330 (5th Cir.1972).

There is no rigid rule or single formula that must be relied upon in order to 

dissolve a preliminary injunction, and a court may rely on a multitude of factors. 

Building and Cons. Trades and Vicinity v. National Labor Relations Bd., 64 F.3d 

880, 888 (3rd Cir. 1995). These factors include the circumstances leading to entry 

of the injunction and the nature of the conduct sought to be prevented, whether the 

party subject to its terms has complied, and the likelihood that the conduct or 

conditions sought to be prevented will recur absent the injunction. Id.

The University has complied with this Court’s Order fully, and with Mr. 

Denton graduating and the 72nd student senate adjourning, the October 8, 2020 

Order is fully satisfied. Therefore, the Courts October 8, 2020 Order should be 

dissolved.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the University respectfully requests that this Court 

dissolve the preliminary injunction entered on October 8, 2020, along with such 

other and further relief as the Court deems appropriate.

Case 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF Document 66 Filed 01/25/21 Page 4 of 6
5

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Robert J. Sniffen 

ROBERT J. SNIFFEN

Florida Bar Number: 0000795

rsniffen@sniffenlaw.com

JEFFREY D. SLANKER

Florida Bar Number: 100391

jslanker@sniffenlaw.com

ELMER C. IGNACIO

Florida Bar Number: 537683

eignacio@sniffenlaw.com

SNIFFEN & SPELLMAN, P.A.

123 North Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Telephone: (850) 205-1996

Facsimile: (850) 205-3004

Counsel for John E. Thrasher, Brandon 

Bowden, and Amy Hecht in their Official 

Capacities

WORD COUNT CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certifies that this document complies with word limits set 

forth in N.D. Fla. Local Rule 7.1(F), as it contains 831 words, which includes the 

headings, footnotes, and quotations, but does not include the case style, signature 

block or Certificates of Word Count and Service.

/s/ Robert J. Sniffen

ROBERT J. SNIFFEN

Case 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF Document 66 Filed 01/25/21 Page 5 of 6
6

CERTIFICATE OF ATTORNEY CONFERENCE

The undersigned certifies that the movant conferred with opposing Counsel 

via telephone prior to filing this motion.

/s/ Robert J. Sniffen 

ROBERT J. SNIFFEN

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on this 25th day of January, 2021, a true and 

correct copy of the foregoing was electronically filed in the U.S. District Court, 

Northern District of Florida, using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of 

electronic filing to all counsel of record.

/s/ Robert J. Sniffen 

ROBERT J. SNIFFEN

Case 4:20-cv-00425-AW-MAF Document 66 Filed 01/25/21 Page 6 of 6