Case Status
3 results
CUYAHOGA FALLS, OH, ET AL. v. BUCKEYE COMMUNITY HOPE (31147)
Order dated: 06/24/02Docket number: 01-1269
Action:
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to Questions 1, 2 and 3 presented by the petition.
CUYAHOGA FALLS, OH, ET AL. v. BUCKEYE COMMUNITY HOPE (31147)
Order dated: 12/16/02Docket number: 01-1269
Action:
The motion of American Planning Association for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is denied. The motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument is granted. The motion of the Solicitor General to allow David B. Salmons to present oral argument pro hac vice is granted.
CUYAHOGA FALLS, OH, ET AL. v. BUCKEYE COMMUNITY HOPE (31147)
Order dated: 02/24/03Docket number: 01-1269
Action:
The motion of respondents for leave to file a supplemental brief after argument is denied.
A description of the questions presented by the case has been prepared:
Limited to Question 1, 2 & 3: 1. In considering a claim against a municipal corporation for intentional discrimination arising out of a facially neutral and judicially updheld referendum petition, may the court inquire into the motivations of a handfull of the citizens who expressed support for the referendum and impute those motivations to the entire municipal corporation. 2. In light of the constitutional freedom of poltical expression, can a disparate impact claim under the Fair Housing Act be maintained against a municipal corporation for the alleged impact of the filing of a facially neutral and judicially upheld referendum petition. 3. Does the due process clause of the constitution require a muncipal corporation to issue building permits when the underlying conditions for the issuance of building permits have not been met and the municipal corporation's witholding of the permits is required by the judgments of state courts of competent jurisdiction?
An opinion has been handed down:
- Concurrence (Scalia)
- Opinion (O'Connor)
- Syllabus