Legal Opinion
Waterfront Renaissance Associates v. City of Philadelphia
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 30, 2010No. Civil Action 07-1045PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
STENGEL, District Judge.
Waterfront Renaissance Associates contends that a City of Philadelphia ordinance is unconstitutional. Enacted in March, 2006, the ordinance set a new building height restriction. 1 According to Waterfront Renaissance, the ordinance empowers unelected civic associations to control re-development, delegates land-use decisions to private entities, and employs a variance process for coercive purposes. The City of Philadelphia wants this claim dismissed because Waterfront Renaissance lacks standing, the City cannot be held liable for actions of third parties, the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- CMR DN CORP and Marina Towers v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Synthes, Inc. v. MarottaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
- Terry v. Northrop Grumman Health PlanDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
- 8 ERIE ST. JC LLC v. CITY OF JERSEY CITYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2020
- ATTIAS v. 532 BROOKLYN, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.