§Why CasetextPricing

Thai Meditation Association of Alabama, Inc. et al v. City of Mobile, Alabama et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment

46 Cited authorities

  1. Village of Willowbrook v. Olech

    528 U.S. 562 (2000)   Cited 6,409 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"

  2. Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.

    572 U.S. 118 (2014)   Cited 2,860 times   70 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff seeking to bring suit under a federal statute must show not only that he has standing under Article III, but also that his "complaint fall within the zone of interests protected by the law" invoked

  3. Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp.

    429 U.S. 252 (1977)   Cited 4,300 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs need show only that "a discriminatory purpose has been a motivating factor in the decision," because, after all, "[r]arely can it be said that a legislature or administrative body operating under a broad mandate made a decision motivated solely by a single concern, or even that a particular purpose was the ‘dominant’ or ‘primary’ one."

  4. Employment Div. v. Smith

    494 U.S. 872 (1990)   Cited 2,260 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the limitation articulated in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398-i.e., that governmental actions that substantially burden a religious practice must be justified by a compelling governmental interest-does not apply to neutral, generally applicable laws

  5. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah

    508 U.S. 520 (1993)   Cited 1,549 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that statements by city council, including asking: "[w]hat can we do to prevent the Church from opening?" to show animus

  6. Griffin v. Irvin

    496 F.3d 1189 (11th Cir. 2007)   Cited 669 times
    Holding that the language in the Equal Protection Clause "may, as it does here, simply operate at too high a level of generality" to make prior case law unnecessary, and that the broad legal principles in "class of one" cases were inapplicable because "the precise facts of a case are critical in evaluating a 'class of one' claim"

  7. Midrash Sephardi, Inc. v. Town of Surfside

    366 F.3d 1214 (11th Cir. 2004)   Cited 430 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a zoning ordinance that limited churches and synagogues to residential districts did not violate the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) because "walking a few extra blocks" is not a substantial burden

  8. Campbell v. Rainbow City

    434 F.3d 1306 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 282 times
    Holding a district court erred in denying judgment as a matter of law when there was no evidence "that a majority of the members of the final policymaker . . . acted with an unconstitutional motive"

  9. Knight v. Baptist Hosp. of Miami, Inc.

    330 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2003)   Cited 254 times
    Holding that more favorable treatment of similarly situated employees outside the race classification is required to make a prima facie race discrimination case

  10. Guru Nanak Sikh Society v. County of Sutter

    456 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 179 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that no additional applications were necessary where there were no zones providing for religious use as of right, county repeatedly denied temple's application for conditional use permits despite temple's efforts to comply with County's requested plan modifications and denial reasons, and reasoning of county's previous denial made the success of any future permit application highly unlikely

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 489,703 times   693 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

  12. Section 2000cc - Protection of land use as religious exercise

    42 U.S.C. § 2000cc   Cited 2,937 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Requiring comparison with a "nonreligious assembly or institution"

  13. Section 2000cc-2 - Judicial relief

    42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-2   Cited 886 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Nothing in RLUIPA "shall be construed to amend or repeal the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995"