¶1 Michael J. Fasbender, John W. Herrin, and unnamed plaintiffs John and Jane Does 1- 25 (collectively Fasbender), challenged the adoption of interim zoning regulations by the Lewis and Clark County Board of County Commissioners (Board). Fasbender appeals from an Order in the First Judicial District, Lewis and Clark County, granting summary judgment to the Board. We affirm.

¶2 We re

[¶1] Appellees/Intervenors, Robert and Gisela Baltensperger (“the Baltenspergers”), applied for and were granted the necessary permits allowing them to construct a barn/equestrian center on their property in Teton County, Wyoming. Appellants, Ernest and Martha Anderson (“the Andersons”), objected to the construction permits and appealed to the Board of County Commissione

Deborah Luper raises dogs on property she owns in the City of Wasilla. City ordinances applicable to her property prohibited keeping more than three dogs without a permit. When the city sued Luper to enforce its ordinance, she applied for a use permit for an eighteen-dog kennel. The city denied her permit application and she appealed. After consolidating her permit appeal with the city’s en

In three issues, Appellants Vineyard Village, Ltd. and Vineyard Village MSV, LLC (AVineyard@) complain that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment for Appellees Univest Properties, Inc. and Yorkshire West Realty Advisors, L.P.,[2] by excluding Vineyard=s summary judgment evidence, and by awarding attorneys= fees to Univest and Yorkshire. We affirm.

II.

The City of San Clemente flatly prohibits the leafleting of unoccupied vehicles parked on city streets. We conclude that petitioners are likely to succeed in demonstrating that the City’s justification for its prohibition is insufficient and that they have otherwise met the requirements for obtaining a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the prohibition.

We therefore reve

The plaintiff, the city of Milford, appeals from the judgment of the trial court increasing the amount of compensation payable to the defendants1 by the plaintiff in connection with the condemnation of certain real property. The plaintiff claims that the court improperly awarded the defendants compensation for the diminution in value of a hypothetical lot of a subdivision when there was no evidenc

This appeal1 arises out of three separate actions2 initiated by the plaintiff, Barry Saunders,3 against the defendants, Burton Firtel, Adco Medical Supplies, Inc. (Adco), and Barbur Associates, LLC (Barbur),4 in which the plaintiff, a former employee of Adco and a member and 50 percent interest holder in Barbur, sought to recover unpaid wages and double damages from Adco under General Statutes �

Defendants and appellants Darrell Kruse (Kruse) and Claremont All Natural Nutrition Aids Buyers Information Service (also known as CANNABIS)1 appeal from the judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and respondent City of Claremont (the City) after the trial court issued a permanent injunction preventing defendants from operating a medical marijuana dispensary anywhere within the City. We affirm the

Daniel Guggenheim and others bring a facial challenge to the City of Goleta’s mobile home rent control ordinance.

Guggenheim argues that the ordinance, which effects a transfer of nearly 90 percent of the property value from mobile home park owners to mobile home tenants, constitutes a regulatory taking under Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978). We h

In 2006, a dispute arose between plaintiff Delois, then a tenant of defendants in a “live/work” space on Harrison Street in San Francisco, and defendants. The dispute, described in more detail below, was purportedly resolved by a written agreement between the parties. But various and sundry factors led to alleged breaches of that agreement; in any event, plaintiff did not vacate the pr

In 2004, the Morgan Hill City Council adopted a resolution that condemned Bruce Tichinin, a local attorney, for hiring a private investigator to conduct surveillance of the city manager and then denying that he had done so. Thereafter, Tichinin filed an action against the City under 42 United States Code section 1983 (hereafter “1983 action”) alleging that the City unlawfully retaliate

This is an appeal from a summary judgment granted in favor of appellees.[1] We affirm. Appellant, Phyllis A. Morton, was a property owner in the Paradise Cove Subdivision. She instituted the underlying action by filing suit against the Paradise Cove Property Owners Association, Inc. (the Association) on May 10, 2005. She alleged in her original petition that the Association had violated the de

New Albany DVD operates an adult store in New Albany, Indiana. It does not provide live or recorded entertainment on site. Customers buy books, magazines, or videos, which they read or watch at home. Plaintiff bought land for this operation in 2003, secured all necessary licenses, and renovated the site’s store to meet its requirements. The land was properly zoned for the business it propos

This contract dispute stems from an unsuccessful attempt to convert a dog racing track into a NASCAR1 racetrack in Plainfield. The plaintiffs, Jeffrey J. LeBlanc and Diane M. LeBlanc, appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendants, New England Raceway, LLC, and its principal, Gene Arganese. On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the court improperly (1) shifted the b

The plaintiff,1 Dennis W. Byars, appeals from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants, Connecticut Condo Connection and Cathy Luciano.2 The plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that his claims are precluded under the doctrine of collateral estoppel. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The following undisputed facts and procedural hi

Appellant Point Clear Holdings, Inc. (“PCH”) appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Appellees H.E. Scobee, Dorothy Scobee, Hank Perkins, and Paula Perkins (collectively “the Lot Owners”). The dispute in this case centers on controlling the use of Pine Grove Drive, a street in Point Clear, Alabama. PCH owns Pine Grove Drive, and the Lot Owners

Plaintiff brought this action against defendants seeking specific performance of a land sale contract. At the close of plaintiff's case-in-chief, the trial court granted defendants' motion for judgment of dismissal with prejudice pursuant to ORCP 54 B(2), but awarded plaintiff $136,024.66 as reimbursement for development costs expended by plaintiff during the pendency of the sale of the land. In

In this case, we must decide the timeliness of various crossappeals filed by the parties seeking to challenge a district court ruling that the plaintiffs possessed only a limited easement in connection with certain real estate located in Dubuque County and rejecting a counterclaim for abuse of process. For the reasons expressed below, we find the cross-appeals timely filed. On the merits of the ea

Sprint Spectrum, L.P. (“Sprint”), sued Platte County, Missouri, alleging that the County’s Planning and Zoning Commission (“Commission”) violated the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“TCA”) by denying Sprint’s application for a special use permit to construct a telecommunications tower. Sprint argued that the Commission’s decision was neither

Derek Davis was a patrol officer for the Shelby County Sheriff’s Department (“Department”). On or about July 25, 2001, the Department instituted the Drug Free Workplace Program (“Program”). On August 17, 2001, Mr. Davis signed an “Acknowledgment of Receipt of Drug Free Workplace Program - Policy and Procedure” form, acknowledging that he received, read, a

Petitioners seek review of an opinion and order of the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). LUBA affirmed in part and remanded a land use decision of Umatilla County (county). The county decision approved a conditional use permit for the operation of a "travel plaza" on property owned by respondent Flying J, Inc. (respondent) adjacent to a federal interstate highway. The permit for the travel plaz

This case presents the question whether the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment prohibit a State from imposing a generally applicable sales and use tax on the distribution of religious materials by a religious organization.




I

California's Sales and Use Tax Law requires retailers to pay a sales tax "[f]or the privilege of selling tangible personal property

The Village of Kiryas Joel in Orange County, New York, is a religious enclave of Satmar Hasidim, practitioners of a strict form of Judaism. The village fell within the Monroe-Woodbury Central School District until a special state statute passed in 1989 carved out a separate district, following village lines, to serve this distinctive population. 1989 N.Y.Laws, ch. 748. The question is whether the

The Texas Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (TRFRA), Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 110, prevents the state and local Texas governments from substantially burdening a person’s free exercise of religion unless the government can demonstrate that doing so furthers a compelling governmental interest in the least restrictive manner. In this case, we must decide if the city of Euless, Texas

The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether a landlord, after withdrawing its complaint in a summary process action, is required to serve a new notice to quit pursuant to General Statutes § 47a-231 prior to filing a new summary process action against its tenant. The plaintiffs, Waterbury Twin, LLC, and 150 MH, LLC, appeal2 from the judgment of the trial court dismissing their summary proces