Case Citator › Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Carson City

Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Carson City

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Ninth Circuit
Citation
303 F.3d 959
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
37 of 37
Citing cases (total)
37
Treatment dates
2008
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court has been abrogated in part: all 37 flagged citations have been read, and the one confirmed treatment is listed below. Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council rejected the preliminary injunction rule allowing a mere possibility of irreparable harm.
More on how this was screened

The Ninth Circuit later identified Winter's effect on Sammartano in Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign v. King County. Courts continue to use Sammartano's First Amendment and public forum analysis.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

37 later cases cite Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Carson City; 37 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Carson City?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court displaced Sammartano's rule that a possibility of irreparable harm can support a preliminary injunction, requiring likely irreparable harm instead.

    Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest. ... Issuing a preliminary injunction based only on a possibility of irreparable harm is inconsistent with our characterization of injunctive relief as an extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Carson City and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace