Laserfiche WebLink
1. nevertheless that the ordinance is a valid and constitutional <br />regulation of time, place and manner, and to achieve two <br />important governmental interests, the one being residential <br />4 privacy, and the other being public safety. <br />5 QUESTION: Mr. Fuhrman, we are reviewing, I guess, <br />the preliminary injunction. <br />7 So is our standard of review whether the lower court <br />8 abused its discretion in the issuance of the injunction? <br />9 MR. FUHRMAN: We contend that it is not. And I would <br />10 like to point out perhaps at this point that although the order <br />11 of the District Court is in form a preliminary injunction, <br />12 actually however, it has finally decided the constitutional <br />13 issue involved, at least from the standpoint of the District <br />14 Court. <br />15 QUESTION: You still want to go to trial? <br />16 MR. FUHRMAN: No. Let me explain. The preliminary <br />17 injunction so-called said that it would become final in the <br />18 event that there were no requests for a trial, number one, by <br />19 any party; and number two, that an appeal would be taken. <br />20 So the protect the interests of the Town of <br />21 Brookfield, we did appeal and we did file a request for a <br />22 trial. But it is clear from a reading of the order that the <br />23 Court had already determined that it would be unnecessary to <br />24 have an evidentiary hearing. <br />25 And there were two reasons for that. Number one, it <br />7 <br />Heritage Reporting Corporation <br />(202) 628-4888 <br />