Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:16-cv-10277—David M. Lawson, District Judge.
Decided and Filed: December 16, 2016
Before: KEITH, SUTTON, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.
The court delivered a PER CURIAM order. SUTTON, J. (pp. 5–13),
delivered a separate dissenting opinion.
The Treasurer of the State of Michigan and the members of the Flint Receivership
Transition Advisory Board (jointly referred to as the “State Defendants”) appeal a preliminary
injunction requiring, among other things, the delivery of bottled water to non-exempt households
served by the Flint water system. They move to stay the injunction pending appeal. Flint
responds in support of the motion for a stay. The Plaintiffs oppose the motion to stay. The State
Defendants filed a reply in support of their motion. The district court denied a stay pending
appeal on December 2, 2016.
As a preliminary matter, we grant the parties’ motions to exceed the page limitations of
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 27(d)(2). The Plaintiffs’ motion to strike is granted because
the State Defendants’ reply brief raises an argument that was not raised in the motion for a stay,
thus obviating the Plaintiff’s need to file a sur-reply.