United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-1625

___________

Republican Party of Minnesota, *

an association; Indian Asian *

American Republicans of *

Minnesota; Republican Seniors, *

an association; Young Republican *

League of Minnesota, a Minnesota *

nonprofit corporation; Minnesota *

College Republicans, an association, *

Gregory F. Wersal, individually; *

Cheryl L. Wersal, individually; *

Mark E. Wersal, individually; *

Corwin C. Hulbert, individually; *

Campaign for Justice, an association; *

Minnesota African American Council, *

an association; Muslim Republicans, *

an association, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Appellants, * District of Minnesota

*

v. * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Verna Kelly, in her capacity as *

Chairperson of the Minnesota Board *

of Judicial Standards, or her successor; *

Charles E. Lundberg, in his capacity as *

Chair of the Minnesota Lawyers *

Professional Responsibility Board, or *

his successor; Edward J. Cleary, in his *

capacity as Director of the Minnesota *
-2-

Office of Lawyers Professional *

Responsibility, or his successor, *

*

Appellees. *

*

------------------------------- *

*

The Minnesota State Bar Association, *

*

Amicus on Behalf of Appellee. *

*

Minnesota Civil Liberties Union, *

*

Amicus on Behalf of Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 19, 1998

Filed: November 2, 1998

___________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gregory F. Wersal, a licensed Minnesota attorney and candidate for the position

of Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, together with his campaign

committee, Campaign for Justice, his wife, Cheryl L. Wersal, his brother, Mark Wersal,

one of his supporters, Corwin C. Hulbert, the Minnesota Republican Party (MRP), and

associations affiliated with the MRP (collectively plaintiffs), appeal from an order of
The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District 1

of Minnesota. 

-3-

 the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota denying their motion for 1

a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction in their action against the Chair

of the Minnesota Board of Judicial Standards, the Chair of the Minnesota Lawyers

Professional Responsibility Board, and the Director of the Office of Lawyers

Professional Responsibility. Republican Party of Minnesota v. Kelly, No. 98-831

(D. Minn. Mar. 9, 1998) (memorandum opinion and order). Plaintiffs brought this civil

action, and moved for injunctive relief, based upon the assertion that certain provisions

of Canon 5 of the Minnesota Judicial Code, as amended on December 23, 1997, violate

their rights under the free speech, free association, and equal protection clauses of the

United States and Minnesota Constitutions. Jurisdiction was proper in the district court

based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Jurisdiction is proper in this court based upon 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292. Upon careful consideration of the record in the present case and the arguments

presented on appeal, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in

denying plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction

under the standard set forth in Dataphase Sys., Inc. v. C. L. Sys., Inc., 640 F.2d 109

(8th Cir. 1981) (en banc). At this stage of the litigation, we express no opinion on the

merits of plaintiffs’ claims. The order of the district court is affirmed. See 8 Cir.

th

R. 47B. 

BEAM, Circuit Judge, dissenting.

I dissent because the district court should have ordered a preliminary injunction

on at least part of the claims asserted.
-4-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.