26 results for 'cat:"Constitution" AND cat:"Municipal Law"'.
J. Coulson denies a former police officer’s estate’s motion for summary judgment seeking a ruling in their favor without a trial in this lawsuit brought by a retired police officer alleging violations of the United States Constitution, the Maryland Declaration of Rights, and Maryland common law. The retired officer alleges he was battered, falsely arrested with excessive and unreasonable force, and maliciously prosecuted by the decedent and fellow officers. The decedent alleged that the retired officer did in fact resist arrest and any reasonable jury could find it was excessive force during handcuffing. Therefore, the decedent is not entitled to qualified immunity, there are genuine disputes of material fact and adequate discovery needs to be developed. The estate may file another motion for summary judgment after the discovery is available.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Coulson, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2379, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Police Misconduct
J. Nguyen finds that the district court properly dismissed a nightclub operator's claim in an action alleging First Amendment and due process violations when the city suspended its license to operate a nightclub for thirty days following a shooting outside the club. The city found the club operated its venue in a manner that caused the shooting and created a public nuisance in violation of San Jose Municipal Code. The club failed to state a procedural due process claim. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Nguyen, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 20-15085, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
J. Stewart finds the district court properly declined to enjoin San Antonio's park development tree removal plans. Members of the Lipan-Apache Native American Church say the city's plan prevented them from performing essential religious ceremonies. Though the court ordered the city to provide access to the area, the city had appointed qualified arborists to evaluate which trees needed to be removed because of construction restrictions and ensured bird deterrence measures are not aimed at preventing the presence of birds. The church members have not demonstrated they are likely to prevail on their claim the district court's only partial grant of their motion for a preliminary injunction was improper. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Stewart, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 23-50746, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Native Americans
J. Overstreet finds that the appeals court improperly found that the state municipal code constitutional preempts the city's home rule authority to administratively adjudicate violations of its ordinances. Therefore, state law is not an appropriate basis to reverse the city hearing officer's decision finding the drivers liable for violating the city's ordinances prohibiting overweight and/or overlength vehicles on non-designated roads. This decision overturns the First District's opinion in Catom Trucking v. City of Chicago. Reversed.
Court: Illinois Supreme Court, Judge: Overstreet, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 129263, Categories: Administrative Law, constitution, municipal Law
J. Standridge finds a lower court improperly ruled that a "noisy conduct" provision in the state's municipal code of ordinance is constitutional. The state argued that a Project Justice protestor did not engage in protective activity when he launched a movement near a federal courthouse while blocking traffic, which resulted in an unlawful citation for noisy conduct. However, the state sufficiently showed in court that the noisy conduct provision is unconstitutional because it is overbroad and prohibits substantial protected conduct. Reversed.
Court: Kansas Supreme Court, Judge: Standridge , Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 124412, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Smith finds that the district court improperly issued an order preliminarily enjoining enforcement of a Seattle ordinance that criminalizes the intentional writing, painting or drawing on property without the express permission of the property’s owner or operator. Individuals claim that the Seattle ordinance was "substantially overbroad under the First Amendment and facially vague under the Fourteenth Amendment." The lower court was incorrect in determining that the ordinance was "facially overbroad," and that the district court never acknowledged the ordinance’s numerous applications that would not implicate protected speech. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Smith, Filed On: February 2, 2024, Case #: 23-35449, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
J. Koh finds that the district court properly granted a preliminary injunction in favor of a homelessness coalition on their Eighth Amendment claim seeking to prevent the City and County of San Francisco from enforcing any ordinance that punishes sleeping, lodging or camping on public property. The city’s new argument did not establish a basis to reverse the district court. The city's limited geographic scope argument was waived because the city conceded that it did not raise the argument with the district court. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Koh, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 23-15087, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
J. Leinenweber denies a firearm owner’s motion for a preliminary injunction against Highland Park’s ban on assault weapons. The court finds the Chicago suburb, where a deadly July 2022 mass shooting occurred, has legally banned the weapons under Second Amendment provisions, based on a “long-established” history of government bodies restricting private access to weapons designed for military use. The court also grants Highland Park’s motion to dismiss a gun rights advocacy group as one of the suit’s plaintiffs, finding the group lacks standing to bring the case.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Leinenweber, Filed On: January 9, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv4774, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Firearms
J. Wilson declares unconstitutional the Truly Agreed and Finally Passed House Bill 1606, which sought to reduce the amount of information certain counties are required to publish in their financial statements, because it violates the single subject requirement. The bill also includes provision to restriction the expenditure of state funds on combating homelessness, and makes the act of sleeping or camping on state-owned lands a class C misdemeanor.
Court: Missouri Supreme Court, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: SC100045, Categories: constitution, Government, municipal Law
J. Ellis finds that the lower court properly ruled that the construction industry groups are unable to challenge the county's expenditures under previous fiscal years dating back to 2016. However, it improperly found for the county on the groups' claims that the county's spending of transportation funds in 2023 violated the Illinois Constitution. It remains unclear from the record which expenses qualified for the comptroller's list of transportation-related expenses, and whether these expenses were correctly designated as related to transportation enforcement or safety. Reversed in part.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Ellis, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 231459, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Transportation
J. Africk grants the nonprofit organization's motion to remand its case accusing New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell of improperly reallocating $32 million from its capital budget to be used for the construction of an addition to the Orleans Justice Center that is required to bring the jail into compliance with a consent decree in another lawsuit. Although the nonprofit's petition may raise a federal question, that question need not be analyzed because the nonprofit lacks Article III standing, depriving the court of subject matter jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Africk, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv5067, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Jurisdiction
J. Kane finds the district court properly affirmed the state water board’s final order granting a permit to Oklahoma City to divert stream water from the Kiamichi River. The board has followed the appropriations system since 1993. The statutes are within the state’s police powers, constitution and the administrative system’s authority to determine water rights of Oklahomans and issue permits. Affirmed.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court, Judge: Kane, Filed On: October 3, 2023, Case #: 118892, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Water
J. Rambin finds that the trial court properly dismissed the suit filed by the residents of a city's extra-territorial jurisdiction, in which they "bring a facial constitutional challenge to the city's ability to regulate private property outside of its territorial borders." The issue raised by the residents is a "nonjusticiable political question" that cannot be addressed "without violating the separation of powers." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Rambin, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 06-22-00078-CV, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Property
J. Douglas finds the district court properly dismissed this civil rights action arising from the evangelical minister’s guilty plea conviction for violating an ordinance designating protests to a specific area during live theater events. The minister seeks to enjoin the state law on which his conviction is based, and he requests “prospective injunctive relief … on grounds of facial unconstitutionality.” According to guiding case law such relief “necessarily implies” the invalidity of the conviction and is barred. The dismissal, though, would bar pursuit of claims even if the conviction were later reversed, and is modified as “without prejudice.” Affirmed as modified.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Douglas, Filed On: August 25, 2023, Case #: 22-60566, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
J. Oldham finds the district court improperly entered a preliminary injunction against Texas’ attorney general preventing him from requiring that the Palestinian-owned engineering firm, as a condition of its municipal contract with the city of Houston, according to Texas law, certify that it will not boycott Israel for the duration of the contract. The firm filed a constitutional claim against the Texas attorney general, alleging civil rights violations. The district court did not have jurisdiction to enter the injunction as any potential injury is not traceable to the official. Reversed and remanded with instructions to vacate the injunction and dismiss the suit.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Oldham, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: 22-20047, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Contract
J. Day admits depositions of township officials in claims contending the township wrongly denied the Islamic Society's application to build a mosque, then instructed witnesses not to respond to questions and blocked inquiries into a related settlement. Counsel for the officials invoked attorney-client privilege based on conclusory statements that negotiations about the settlement were protected, and deposition transcripts do not contain legal conclusions.
Court: USDC New Jersey, Judge: Day, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: 3:17cv5595, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Privilege
J. Hodge grants the Philadelphia Parking Authority’s (PPA) motion to dismiss in this matter concerning parking violations. A citizen had outstanding parking violations and her vehicle was impounded. When she went to pay the tickets and fines to retrieve the vehicle, instead of being assessed the amount of violations pertaining to the vehicle, she was presented with a list of violations under her name totaling $3,705, which included violations by her mother, who shares the same name, going back decades. The citizen went through the process of attending an administrative hearing where they affirmed that she must pay the fines before retrieving the vehicle, but did not notify the citizen of the corrected amount of $1,063; her vehicle was subsequently sold at auction. While the court grants dismissal to the PPA, as it acted properly, as well as all individual defendants, it denies dismissal to the City of Philadelphia. The citizen sufficiently argued that the Bureau of Administrative Adjudication (BAA), as part of the City of Philadelphia, may have violated her constitutional right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Hodge, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: 22-1155, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: constitution, Government, municipal Law
J. Marston denies a Township’s motion to dismiss in this matter concerning a resolution. The Pennsylvania State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police and Springfield Township Police Benevolent Association (PBA) use the Thin Blue Line American Flag as part of their organizational activities to show support for law enforcement, with the PBA having incorporated it into its logo. But the Township believes it is viewed negatively by many groups and communities and is divisive as it symbolizes police brutality and racial animosity; as such, the Springfield Township Board of Commissioners passed Resolution 1592 which works to eliminate the display of the Thin Blue Line American Flag Symbol by any Township employee, agent or consultant while on duty, when representing the Township or on any Township owned property. The PBA claims the resolution violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and specifically, section three prohibiting the display and affixation of the symbol on Township-owned property negatively impacts the organization, as it would prohibit them from displaying its logo during gatherings and fundraising events held in places such as public parks, which they have done in the past and wish to do in the future. The instant court finds the organizations have legal standing.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Marston, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: 2:23-cv-332, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
J. Vaughan finds that the lower court properly denied the citizens's request for a declaratory judgment that the city's ordinance authorizing fees related to driving infractions that resulted in vehicles being towed was unconstitutional. The towing fee of $400 for a Level 1 infraction and $200 for a Level 2 infraction are not grossly inflated based on the actual cost of impoundment. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Vaughan, Filed On: June 20, 2023, Case #: 220542, Categories: constitution, municipal Law
J. Lorenz dismisses claims brought by a short-term rental alliance group seeking to enjoin the City of San Diego from enforcing ordinances that regulate short-term residential rentals not occupied by the host. The ordinance does not target property owners, whether they occupy the rental property or not, but rather distinguishes between short-term rentals based on whether they are occupied by a host. The ordinance does not require that the property owner act as the host. The city has legitimate reasons for the ordinance, including preserving the available housing inventory and preserving the neighborhood character.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Lorenz, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1831, NOS: Housing/Accommodations - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Housing
J. Anderson affirms the district court's finding that language in a proposed charter amendment that has been deemed unconstitutional is not severable from the rest of the amendment. The purpose of the amendment, which would have overhauled the city's municipal elections, is fundamentally tied to the unconstitutional language, which would have blocked the use of ranked-choice voting unless previously approved by voters in a manner preempted by state statute. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: A22-1190, Categories: constitution, Elections, municipal Law
J. Brasel grants summary judgment to the city and its officials in the landlords' suit against them alleging that a rent-stabilization ordinance passed by voters in 2021 is unconstitutional under the Minnesota and U.S. Constitutions. The ordinance does not substantially impair the landlords' leases under the contract clause and it appropriately and reasonably advances a significant and legitimate purpose, namely ensuring that residents have access to affordable housing. The landlords also have not shown that the ordinance violates the Due Process Clause, causing their Section 1983 claim to fail, and a preemption claim under state law is moot. Finally, the ordinance does not create a regulatory taking under either Constitution.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Brasel, Filed On: May 22, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv1589, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: constitution, municipal Law, Housing