green
Positive treatment
6.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Red Maple Properties v. Zoning Commission
The Supreme Court ruled that zoning regulations will survive substantive due process challenge unless they are ‘clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.’ Id. at 395, 47 S. Ct. at 121 .” Id., 915.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
RRI Realty Corp. v. Incorporated Village of Southampton
The Supreme Court ruled that zoning regulations will survive substantive due process challenge unless they are “clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.” Id. at 395, 47 S.Ct. at 121 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rri Realty Corp. v. Village Of Southampton
The Supreme Court ruled that zoning regulations will survive substantive due process challenge unless they are "clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare." Id. at 395, 47 S.Ct. at 121 .
cited
Cited "see"
EM Bagels, Ltd. v. Bagel Emporium of Armonk, Inc.
See Warbern Packaging Industries, Inc. v. Cut Rate Plastic Hangers, Inc., 652 F.2d 987 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1014 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lorenzo
See United States v. Caggiano, 660 F.2d 184 , 191 (6th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1015 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982); United States v. Hubbard, 493 F.Supp. 206, 208 (D.C. 1979), aff'd, 668 F.2d 1238 (1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 926 , 102 S.Ct. 1971 / 72 L.Ed.2d 440 (1982); see also United States v. Judge, 625 F.Supp. 901, 902 (D.Haw. 1986) (questioning applicability of vicarious disqualification rule to Federal Public Defenders office), aff'd, 855 F.2d 863 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 959 , 109 S.Ct. 402 , 102 L.Ed.2d 390 (1988); People ex rel Younger v. Superior Cour…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Windyceslau D. Lorenzo, United States of America v. Roger Elvick, United States of America v. Nathan K. Brown, United States of America v. Ron Knutt, United States of America v. Thomas Porter
See United States v. Caggiano, 660 F.2d 184, 191 (6th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1015 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982); United States v. Hubbard, 493 F.Supp. 206, 208 (D.C.1979), aff'd, 668 F.2d 1238 (1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 926 , 102 S.Ct. 1971 , 72 L.Ed.2d 440 (1982); see also United States v. Judge, 625 F.Supp. 901, 902 (D.Haw.1986) (questioning applicability of vicarious disqualification rule to Federal Public Defenders office), aff'd, 855 F.2d 863 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 959 , 109 S.Ct. 402 , 102 L.Ed.2d 390 (1988); People ex rel Younger v. Superior Court (…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Stephen Goot
See United States v. Caggiano, 660 F.2d 184, 188 (6th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1015 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Public Service Co. of New Hampshire v. New Hampshire (In Re Public Service Co. of New Hampshire)
See National Hosp. & Institutional Builders Co. v. *125 Goldstein, 658 F.2d 39 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1014 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982); In re Beker Industries Corp., 57 B.R. 611 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. George W. Schell John B. Cain, Jr., A/K/A John Boy Thomas R. Stevens, A/K/A Hyper and Freda Virginia Gallo Wilson
See United States v. Caggiano, 660 F.2d 184, 190-91 (6th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1015 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982); Gajewski v. United States, 321 F.2d 261, 267-68 (8th Cir.1963).
discussed
Cited "see"
Basiardanes v. City of Galveston
And a classification created by a zoning law is subject to this minimal scrutiny standard, Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S. 1 , 94 S.Ct. 1536 , 39 L.Ed.2d 797 (1974); see Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 395 , 47 S.Ct. 114, 121 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1926), as is a classification made by other police power regulation, McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 425-27 , 81 S.Ct. 1101, 1104-05 , 6 L.Ed.2d 393 (1961); see Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights, 418 U.S. 298, 303 , 94 S.Ct. 2714, 2717 , 41 L.Ed.2d 770 (1974) (plurality opinion).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hart Book Stores, Inc. v. Edmisten
And a classification created by a zoning law is subject to this minimal scrutiny standard, Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S. 1, 8 , 94 S.Ct. 1536 , 39 L.Ed.2d 797 (1974); see Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 395 , 47 S.Ct. 114 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1926), as is a classification made by other police power regulation, McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 425-27 , 81 S.Ct. 1101 , 6 L.Ed.2d 393 (1961); see Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights, 418 U.S. 298, 304 , 94 S.Ct. 2714 , 41 L.Ed.2d 770 (1974) (plurality opinion).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hart Book Stores, Inc. Raleigh Books, Inc. Tri-State News, Inc. Ronald Mothershead, D/B/A R. And M. Adult Book Store Jesse F. Frye, Jr., D/B/A L. & J. News Stand Larry Gene Moore, D/B/A E. & M. Enterprises Thomas Page, D/B/A Player's Book Store Joseph Raymond Mc Broom, D/B/A M Distributors Camera's Eye, Inc., a North Carolina Corporation v. Rufus Edmisten, Attorney General of North Carolina Randolph Riley, Districtattorney for 10th Judicial District E. Raymond Alexander, District Attorneyfor 18th Judicial District Donald K. Tisdale, District Attorney for 21stjudicial Districtdonald Jacobs, District Attorney for 8th Judicial District Dan K. Edwards,district Attorney for 14th Judicial District H. W. Zimmerman, Districtattorney for 22nd Judicial District Donald Greene, District Attorney for 25thjudicial Districtjames C. Roberts, District Attorney for 19th Judicial District, W. A. Allen,sheriff, Durham County, North Carolina T. B. Seagroves, Chief of Police, Cityof Durham, North Carolina the State of North Carolina William H. Andrews,district Attorneyfor 4th Judicial District William Allen Cobb, District Attorney for 5thjudicial District Edward W. Grannis, Jr., District Attorney for 12th Judicialdistrict Wade Barber, Jr., District Attorney for 15(b) Judicial District C.D. Knight, Sheriff,orange County, North Carolina Herman Stone, Chief of Police, City of Chapelhill, North Carolina, U. T. Incorporated, a Georgia Corporation, D/B/A Camera's Eye Bookstore Andmind's Eye, Inc., a North Carolina Corporation, D/B/A as Mind's Eye Andimperial Book Store v. Rufus Edmisten, Attorney General of the State of North Carolina Joseph Brown, District Attorney of the Twenty-Seventh Judicial District and Individually C.C. Elmore, Chief of Police of City of Gastonia and Individually Petergilchrist,district Attorney for the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District and Individuallydonald Greene, District Attorney for the Twenty-Fifth Judicial District Andindividually
And a classification created by a zoning law is subject to this minimal scrutiny standard, Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S. 1, 8 , 94 S.Ct. 1536 , 39 L.Ed.2d 797 (1974); See Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 395 , 47 S.Ct. 114 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1926), as is a classification made by other police power regulation, McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 425-27 , 81 S.Ct. 1101 , 6 L.Ed.2d 393 (1961); See Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights, 418 U.S. 298, 304 , 94 S.Ct. 2714 , 41 L.Ed.2d 770 (1974) (plurality opinion).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Matter of Grand Jury Investigation of Targets
See also United States v. Caggiano, 660 F.2d 184, 190-91 (6th Cir.1981) (holding that vicarious disqualification does not apply to U.S. Attorney’s Offices), cert. denied, sub nom., Winfield v. United States, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1015 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982); Formal Opinion 342, 62 A.B.A.J. 517 (1976) (stating the opinion of the ABA Committee on Professional Ethics that prosecutors were different from private attorneys, because "[t]he channeling of advocacy toward a just result as opposed to vindication of a particular claim lessens the temptation to circumvent the disciplinary rules”)…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Office of Surface Mining, United States Department of Interior v. Sewanee Land, Coal & Cattle, Inc. (In Re Sewanee Land, Coal & Cattle, Inc.)
See, e.g., In the Matter of National Hospital and Institutional Builders Co., 658 F.2d 39 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied Goldstein v. Garrity, 454 U.S. 1149 , 102 S.Ct. 1014 , 71 L.Ed.2d 303 (1982); Missouri v. Bankruptcy Court, 647 F.2d 768 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied 454 U.S. 1162 , 102 S.Ct. 1035 , 71 L.Ed.2d 318 *702 (1982).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Alexander
v.
Kessler, Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia
v.
Kessler, Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia
No. 81-931.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 11, 1982.
Published
Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.