green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.2 score
“once deemed an unconstitutional prior restraint, a permit scheme is simply unconstitutional, and no strong showing under time, place, and manner doctrine can change that.”
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Diamond v. City of Taft
once deemed an unconstitutional prior restraint, a permit scheme is simply unconstitutional, and no strong showing under time, place, and manner doctrine can change that.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,218, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3050, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 5110, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7454 Julius Gray Leroy William Rodewald v. First Winthrop Corp. Winthrop Financial Co., Inc. Winthrop Securities Co., Inc. 353 San Francisco Associates
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
Id. at 586.
discussed
Cited "see"
BICKERS v. CITY OF TERRE HAUTE
See Graff v. City of Chicago, 9 F.3d 1309, 1335 (7th Cir. 1993) (Ripple, J., concurring) (determin- ing after a thorough reading of precedent that the "presence of unfettered discretion" renders a licensing scheme subject to prior-restraint analysis rather than only Ren- ton-type scrutiny), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 (1994); see also Forsyth Cnty. v. Na- tionalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123 , 130–31 (1992) ("A government regulation that al- lows arbitrary application is inherently inconsistent with a valid time, place, and manner regulation because such discretion has the potential for becoming…
discussed
Cited "see"
R.V.S., LLC v. City of Rockford
See MacDonald v. City of Chicago, 243 F.3d 1021, 1030 (7th Cir.2001), (citing Graff v. City of Chicago, 9 F.3d 1309, 1335 (7th Cir.1993))(en banc)(Ripple, J., concurring), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 464 (1994), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1113 , 122 S.Ct. 919 , 151 L.Ed.2d 884 (2002).
cited
Cited "see"
Nightclubs Inc v. Cty Paducah
See Graff v. City of Chicago, Workers Union, Local 1099 v. Southwest Ohio Reg’l Transit Auth., 163 9 F.3d 1309 (7th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Nightclubs, Inc.,plaintiff-Appellant v. City of Paducah
(2×)
See Graff v. City of Chicago, 9 F.3d 1309 (7th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 (1994). 9 Even if Justice O'Connor's plurality opinion could be read as reducing the prompt judicial review requirement, it was joined by only two other justices, and, therefore, could not have overruled Freedman.
discussed
Cited "see"
Ramada Franchise Systems, Inc. v. Tresprop, Ltd.
(2×)
See Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718 (7th Cir.1993) (citing Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635, 640 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980)), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Towers v. City of Chicago
Goodfriend v. Board of Appeals of Cook County, 18 Ill.App.3d 412 , 305 N.E.2d 404, 409 (1973); see Holstein v. City of Chicago, 29 F.3d 1145, 1148 (7th Cir.1994) (recognizing defendant’s right to seek review of municipality’s administrative decision by state circuit court under writ of certiorari, citing Graff v. City of Chicago, 9 F.3d 1309, 1325 (7th Cir.1993), cert, denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 464 (1994)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,497 John D. Marks v. Cdw Computer Centers, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, F/k/a Mpk Computing, Inc., and Michael P. Krasny
(2×)
See Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718, 722 (7th Cir.1993), certiorari denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Gray v. First Winthrop Corp.
See Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 722 (7th Cir.1993) ("If the stock rebounded from the cellar [the plaintiffs] would have investment profits, and if it stayed in the cellar they would have legal damages."), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wuliger v. Owens
(2×)
See also, Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wuliger v. Sewell
(2×)
See also, Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wuliger v. Anstaett
(2×)
See also, Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied,, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wuliger v. Christie
(2×)
See also, Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jacobsen v. Howard
See also City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc., 507 U.S. 410, 438, 445 , 113 S.Ct. 1505, 1525 , 123 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993) (Rehnquist, C.J., dissenting) (stating that a city could order the removal of all newsracks from its public rights-of-way). 16 In Graff v. City of Chicago, 9 F.3d 1309 (7th Cir.1993) (en banc), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1085 , 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 464 (1994), the Seventh Circuit considered a challenge to a city ordinance governing the licensing of sidewalk newsstands.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Picard Chemical Inc. Profit Sharing Plan v. Perrigo Co.
See, e.g., Tregenza v. Great American Communications Co., 12 F.3d 717, 718 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 114 S.Ct. 1837 , 128 L.Ed.2d 465 (1994); Menowitz v. Brown, 991 F.2d 36, 41-42 (2d Cir.1993); Anixter v. Home-Stake Prod.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Paddio
v.
Board of Trustees for State Colleges and Universities of Louisiana
v.
Board of Trustees for State Colleges and Universities of Louisiana
No. 93-1554.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 16, 1994.
Published
Citer courts: E.D. California (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.