Legal Opinion
Perfect Puppy, Inc. v. City of East Providence
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided December 8, 2015No. 15-1553PPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Prologue
THOMPSON, Circuit Judge.
We write today about a suit started in state court and removed to fed eral court. As relevant here, Perfect Puppy, Inc. (our plaintiff) believes it has a rock-solid facial — and as-applied-takings claim against the City of East Providence (our defendant) based on a city ordinance banning dog and cat sales. 1 A district judge, though, gave any supposed facial claim the boot on summary judgment for lack of development and remanded the as-applied claim to state court for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. An unhappy Perfect Puppy appeals. But we see no error…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. Ilario M.A. ZanninoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Burford v. Sun Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Quackenbush v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Vélez-Ramírez v. Puerto Rico Ex Rel. Secretary of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016
- Arrigoni Enters., LLC v. Town of DurhamSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Arrigoni Enterprises, LLC. v. DurhamSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Barth v. City of PeabodyDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2018
- Marasco & Nesselbush, LLP v. CollinsDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.