Legal Opinion
Bay Area Addiction Research & Treatment, Inc. v. City of Antioch
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 3, 1999No. 98-16612PublishedCited by 136 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TASHIMA, Circuit Judge:
In 1998, Bay Area Addiction Research and Treatment, Inc. (“BAART”) and California Detoxification Programs, Inc. (“CDP”) tried to relocate their methadone clinic to the City of Antioch, California. After BAART and CDP received notice from Antioch that the proposed location could be used for such a clinic under Antioch’s zoning plan, the Antioch City Council enacted an urgency ordinance prohibiting *728the operation of methadone clinics within 500 feet of residential areas, thereby precluding the use of the proposed site. BAART, individual patients of BAART, CDP, and Dr. Ron…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Thomas Jefferson University v. ShalalaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. YeskeySupreme Court of the United States · 1998
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by136 opinions
- Xochitl Hernandez v. Jefferson SessionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Lovell v. ChandlerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Richard McGary v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Arizona Dream Act Coalition v. Janice BrewerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Thompson v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
131 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.