Jeremy Mayfield attorney reiterates that he no longer wants an injunction to get back on track
Suspended driver Jeremy Mayfield is not interested in an injunction to get back on the race track, his attorney reiterated in a filing Wednesday in the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Mayfield, who was suspended by NASCAR for what it says was a May 1 positive test for methamphetamines, obtained an injunction July 1 from U.S. District Court Judge Graham Mullen that temporarily reinstated him and allowed him to race again. He never did get back on track and the appeals court granted NASCAR’s request for a stay of the injunction July 24. Mayfield has been suspended since then and has sold his team, and the earliest he could get back on the track is next year since the appeal hearing is not scheduled until Dec. 1.
Mayfield is trying to have NASCAR’s appeal dropped, according to the court filing Wednesday, so the case can move quickly. The earliest a trial would be is September 2010, and the only consequence for not having the injunction is that Mayfield would not be able to race in NASCAR until a decision is made at trial.
“To be clear, [Mayfield’s] primary interest is to get this case heard by a jury as quickly and efficiently as possible,” Mayfield attorney Dan Marino wrote in a filing Wednesday. “Again, to be clear, [Mayfield] states categorically that he will not oppose any effort to vacate the preliminary injunction going forward; nor will he seek again the preliminary injunctive relief previously ordered by the District Court. Thus, this appeal is completely moot. and the matter should either be remanded to the District Court or dismissed outright.”
One of the ways the appeal can be dropped is for it to be sent back to Mullen, who has indicated in other decisions that he would now rule in favor of NASCAR and not Mayfield after the disputed results of tests taken July 6 were submitted to the court as well as additional affidavits.
NASCAR wants the Dec. 1 hearing to go on as scheduled, at least in part because it wants certain issues brought up in the case to be decided, according to documents it filed Monday. Any decision by the appeals court would set a legal precedent, which could impact future lawsuits.
