Ok..I read the Complaint (I've never heard of Alan Shay, but that does not mean anything). I do not see this case going very far and anticipate it will be dismissed within 6 months (2-615/2-619). Plaintiff's counsel may try to amend a few times - we shall see. I just do not see privity of contract between any of the Plaintiffs (exception: possibly the school as a member), especially the parents, unless they can successfully argue some sort of implied contract. Also, no "wherefore" clause after Plaintiff's first Count for breach of K. Hyper technical, but I'd move to strike. I probably would have done the same thing attorney Shay is doing, i.e. get something on file, so I can file my emergency motion for injunctive relief and get in front of the judge as quickly as possible. In order for Plaintiffs to prevail on an emergency motion for injunctive relief (remember, we are asking the court to compel a party to do something, or refrain from doing something - not an easy thing to do) they must be able to show the following at the emergency hearing:
(1) likelihood of success on the merits; (2) irreparable harm; (3) that less harm will result to the defendant if the TRO issues than to the plaintiffs if the TRO does not issue; and (4) that the public interest, if any, weighs in favor of plaintiff.
I just do not see the court making a finding in favor of the Plaintiff's with regard to #1 and possibly #2 and #3. Therefore, if Plaintiffs lose on the TRO and NAZ plays, then the supposed harm has already occurred thereby rendering the the Complaint moot (or mute if you are some of the posters on this site). With the exception of the relief being sought with regard to Mercado. Of course, my analysis was done quickly and is quite glib.