constitutional procedural due process. An amended complaint filed near the end of the two days of court hearing asserted a cause of action for damages.
Jurisdiction in this Court is invoked by Plaintiffs under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, 1343, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and "the all-writs Section of the United States judicial code and other applicable statutes."
This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1343 and its substantive corollary 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to entertain an action to redress the deprivation under color of state law of any right secured by the Constitution or by an act of Congress providing for the equal rights of citizens.
The expulsion here was by a private preparatory school with no significant relationship to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and thus the expulsion was not under color of state law. Browns v. Mitchell, 409 F.2d 593 (10th Cir. 1969) and Grossner v. Columbia University, 287 F. Supp. 535 (S.D.N.Y. 1968). 28 U.S.C. § 1343 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are inapposite.
There is no federal question which would confer jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
Assuming, without deciding, that this Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 relating to diversity, Plaintiffs must satisfy two prerequisites before a preliminary injunction may issue. These are (1) that Plaintiffs will be irreparably injured pendente lite if the preliminary injunction be denied and (2) that there is a reasonable probability of eventual success in the litigation. ALK Corp. v. Columbia Pictures, 440 F.2d 761 (3d Cir., 1971).
The Plaintiffs have met the first requirement but I am not convinced that there is a reasonable probability that Plaintiffs will eventually succeed in this litigation.
Accordingly, the Court will decline to grant Plaintiffs a preliminary injunction. The Temporary Restraining Order will be vacated.
This opinion shall constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.