Legal Opinion
United States v. McFadden
District Court, W.D. Missouri
Decided August 4, 1999No. Criminal Action 98-03046-01CR, 98-03047-01CRPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ENGLAND, United States Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is defendants’ supplemental motion to dismiss the two-count information against them.
Defendants assert that the regulations governing noncommercial assembly of 75 or more persons in the National Forest are facially unconstitutional because they allow the issuing officer unbridled discretion in imposing terms and conditions on the permit holder. Defendants specifically contend that: 1) the regulations under which they are charged are not a valid time, place and manner restriction because they allow Forest Service officers…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ward v. Rock Against RacismSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- United States v. Harold W. KistnerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. John E. Johnson, III William v. Letempt Jeffery O. Pike Daniel GallagherCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
- Black v. ArthurDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1998
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Van Arnam v. General Services AdministrationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2004
- United States v. Joan H. Kalb, in No. 00-1733 United States of America v. Garrick M. Beck, in No. 00-1734 United States v. Stephen M. Sedlacko, in No. 00-1746Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Tony R. NenningerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004
- Ellinos, Inc. v. Austintown TownshipDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2002
- United States v. KalbCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.