Per a posting by Attorney Atkinson to the CCDL Facebook group, an opening brief has been filed to the Second Circuit asking the court to strike CT’s ban on public park carry down.
Opening brief to Second Circuit: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GX41dhRtRxM4R2rbvibNdwsbh_xVZiNI/view
A small portion of the opening brief follows:
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
I. Whether the district court erred by granting Dykes’ motion for summary judgment and denying Nastri’s motion for summary judgment.
II. Whether the district court erred by denying Nastri’s motion for a permanent injunction.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal from an order and judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Bolden, J.) denying summary judgment to Plaintiff David Nastri and granting summary judgment and final judgment to Defendant Katie Dykes. SPA.1; 2 Nastri v. Dykes, No. 3:23-cv-00056 (VAB), 2025 WL 2884945 (D. Conn. Sept. 30, 2025).
In this case, Nastri sought declaratory and injunctive relief against Dykes for her enforcement of Connecticut’s prohibition on carrying firearms in state parks and forests for any other purpose other than hunting certain species of small game. Nastri filed this lawsuit on January 14, 2023. App.646. The district court (Arterton, J.) initially dismissed the lawsuit and denied Nastri’s motion for a preliminary injunction in a written decision on July 12, 2023. See Nastri v. Dykes, 2023 WL 4491621 (D. Conn. Jul. 12, 2023). Judge Arterton subsequently denied Nastri’s motion for reconsideration in a written decision issued on August 16, 2023. See Nastri v. Dykes, 2023 WL 5276396 (Aug. 16, 2023).
This Court reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Nastri v. Dykes, No. 23-2023, 2024 WL 1338778 (2d. Cir. Mar. 29, 2024). On remand, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Judge Victor A. Bolden granted Dykes’s motion, denied Nastri’s, and denied permanent injunctive relief. SPA.1-57; see Nastri v. Dykes, No. 3:23-cv-00056 (VAB), 2025 WL 2884945 (D. Conn. Sept. 30, 2025). This appeal timely followed.
…
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Nastri respectfully requests the Court reverse the judgment of the district court, and remand with instructions for the district court to enter judgment in his favor and for further proceedings to determine the appropriate scope of permanent injunctive relief.