8 results for 'cat:"Municipal Law" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Clarke dismisses the landlords' complaint that the county's code enforcement officer wrongfully accused the landlords of violating county code by not obtaining agricultural exemptions or structural permits for 20 greenhouse structures and not obtaining electrical permits for the same 20 greenhouses, leading to a citation for $40,000 fine. The landlords do not state a claim for wrongful use of civil proceedings because while they may have a valid defense for the legality of the structures that their tenant built on their property, they do not allege that the code enforcement officer did not have probable cause to issue the citation.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Clarke, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1607, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, municipal Law, due Process
J. Du denies Reno's motion to dismiss the adult cabaret performers' denial of due process claims. The performers, who are all between the ages of 18 and 21, challenged the city's new minimum age requirements for cabaret performers. Regardless of whether state law preempts the provision, the condition exists in which the city has issued business licenses to adults under 21, but then effectively prohibited them from continuing to perform. Therefore, the performers have suffered a plausible injury in fact.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Du , Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 3:19cv693, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, municipal Law, due Process
J. Ryu declines to dismiss claims alleging that the City of San Mateo has a practice of turning over control of seized vehicles to private tow companies without due process. The claims come from a leasing company that says it is entitled to possession of a Volkswagen after an individual could not keep up with her payments, but that the city told a towing company to store it and not release it without city approval. The city's defense that it was entitled to the seizure of the car under its community caretaking functions relies on facts not related to the complaint against it, and the complaint itself meets the bar of raising valid due process concerns at this stage.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Ryu, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 4:23cv2884, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: municipal Law, due Process
J. Cadish finds the district court properly denied the petition for judicial review contesting the county planning commission’s approval of the property owner's petition that the county abandon a portion of a road adjacent to his property that encroached into a cul-de-sac. Though other property owners say that delivery and emergency vehicles would be hindered by the abandonment, evidence that the road’s width will not be changed supports the approval of the abandonment and the county’s affirmation of the approval. The court did not abuse its discretion in striking filings as it has inherent authority to do so. Any existing easements can be easily relocated and all opportunity for hearing has been given. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Cadish, Filed On: October 30, 2023, Case #: 84611, Categories: municipal Law, Property, due Process
J. Sanchez finds the trial court properly denied the city’s anti-SLAPP motion in this suit brought by the provider of homeless services after its license was terminated due to safety concerns. The termination was not posted in an agenda at least 72 hours prior to the city council’s meeting, according to code. The city says that because the agenda described the meeting as discussing legal matters, the due process complaint arose out of protected activity. In fact, the complaint targeted the city’s failure to provide adequate notice of the confirmation of the license termination rather than anything said at the meeting. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Sanchez, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: G061693, Categories: Anti-slapp, municipal Law, due Process
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. Edmondson finds the trial court improperly granted summary judgment to the city in this suit brought by the hotel operator on claims that the Tulsa Tourism Improvement District was improperly created because more than 50% of hotel owners protested. The city has produced only disputed evidence, which is insufficient to support the court’s conclusion that certain “Notices to the Public” were not sufficient protests in writing because they were “prepared, signed and delivered” after the district was created. Reversed and remanded.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court, Judge: Edmondson, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: 119662, Categories: Administrative Law, municipal Law, due Process