PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SE PENNSYLVANIA v. Casey, Civ. A. No. 88-3228.

Decision Date11 January 1990
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 88-3228.
PartiesPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTH-EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA, et al. v. Robert P. CASEY, et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Thomas E. Zemaitis and Kathryn Kolbert, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.

Kate L. Mershimer, for defendants.

ORDER

HUYETT, District Judge.

Upon consideration of the parties' respective positions as expressed at the conference on this date attended by Thomas E. Zemaitis, Esquire, and Kathryn Kolbert, Esquire, attorneys for plaintiffs, and Kate L. Mershimer, Esquire, attorney for defendants, IT IS ORDERED that this court's preliminary injunction of May 23, 1988, 686 F.Supp. 1089, in this action is clarified as follows:

Paragraph 3 of the preliminary injunction, enjoining the enforcement of certain provisions of Section 3214(a) of the Act applies and will continue to apply to Section 3214(a) as amended by the 1989 amendments to the Act. Act of November 17, 1989, No. 64, amending 18 Pa.Cons.Stat. Ann. §§ 3201-20.

Paragraph 6 of the preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from implementing or enforcing any provision of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982 that contains the term "medical emergency" as defined in Section 3203 of the Act applies and will continue to apply to all provisions of the Act that contain the term "medical emergency," including, but not limited to, the following provisions amended or added by the 1989 amendments to the Act: Sections 3205, 3206, 3209, 3210 and 3211(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Planned Parenthood v. Casey
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • August 24, 1990
    ...defendants, the preliminary injunction order to encompass the 1989 amendments to the Act. See Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 736 F.Supp. 633 (E.D.Pa.1990) ("Casey II"). The trial of this action on the merits was held during the week of July 30, 1990. The parties h......
  • Fell v. Rafferty, Civ. A. No. 88-3152.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • May 4, 1990
    ... ... of relief based solely on passage of time); Pennsylvania ex rel. Herman v. Claudy, 350 U.S. 116, 123, 76 S.Ct. 223, ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT