Judges Order 5/31/95

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


William Thomas, et. al.       |   
      Plaintiffs pro se,      | 
                              |      
       v.                     |          C.A. No. 95-1018
                              |       Judge Charles R. Richey
The United States, et. al.    |      
      Defendants.             |

ORDER

The above-captioned case came before the Court on May 30, 1995 on the Plaintiff's application for a Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO"). Also before the Court at that time was the Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File in Forma Pauperis, which the Court granted.

The Court held a hearing on the Plaintiff's application for a TRO. The pro se Plaintiff, counsel for the United States, and counsel for the District of Columbia appeared at the hearing. The Court heard testimony from the Plaintiff himself about the facts underlying the allegations contained therein, as well as testimony from Captain Michael Radzilowski of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department.

Upon careful consideration of the entire record before it, the Court denied the Plaintiff's application for a TRO. For the reasons articulated from the bench, the Court found that the Plaintiff had not met the requirements for a TRO, namely, (1) likelihood of success on the merits; (2) a threat of immediate irreparable harm; (3) that the issuance of an injunction will not

2

harm the other parties; and (4) that the issuance of the injunction will not be adverse to the public interest. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841, 843 (D.C. Cir 1977).

The Court also set a schedule for the filing of further pleadings regarding the Plaintiff's Complaint and Petition for a Preliminary Injunction.

Accordingly, it is, by the Court, this 30 day of May, 1995,

ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File in Forma Pauperis shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for the federal Defendants and Corporation counsel shall each file a dispositive Motion or other responsive pleading on or before 4:00 p.m. on July 14, 1995; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff may file a response thereto on or before 4:00 p.m. on June 21, 1995



_______________________
CHARLES R. RICHEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE