Haley-Wilson Motion to Dimiss Condon v. Haley for Failure to State Claim

November 9, 2014

The following is an excerpt, for the complete document click here
Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and (6), the Defendants Haley and Wilson move to dismiss the Complaint in this case because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and the Plaintiffs
have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for the following reasons:
  1. This case is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine See, State ex rel Wilson v. Condon, No. 2014-002121, 2014 WL 5038396, at *1-2 (S.C. Oct. 9, 2014)
  2. This suit is barred by Federalism and the controlling precedent of Baker v. Nelson, 409 U.S. 810 (1972).
  3. This suit is barred against these defendants by the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
  4. The Plaintiffs lack standing to sue these Defendants.
  5. This Court should abstain under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) due to the pendency of State v Wilson, supra.
  6. As a matter of comity, this Court should decline to consider this case because a prior Federal case is pending, Katherine Bradacs and Tracie Goodwin v Haley, et al, Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-02351
  7. To the extent that, arguendo, Baker, supra, does not apply, the Defendants Governor and Attorney General argue against the Bostic v. Schaefer, 760 F.3d 352 (4th Cir. 2014).and seek to preserve those arguments for further review.
  8. S.C. Code Ann 20-1-10 and 20-1-15; S.C. Const art. XVII, 15 are constitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.