Legal Opinion · Dissent
Wedgewood Ltd. Partnership I v. Township of Liberty
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided June 28, 2010No. 08-4446Published
1DissentJames G. Carr, District Judge
Because my understanding of the law controlling an aspect of the case before us differs from that of the majority, I respectfully dissent.
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, § 1. To establish *356a procedural due process violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Wedgewood must show that “ ‘(1) [it] had a life, liberty, or property interest protected by the Due Process Clause; (2) it was deprived of this protected interest; and (3) the state did not afford [it]…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Experimental Holdings, Inc. v. FarrisCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Women's Medical Professional Corporation Martin Haskell, M.D. v. J. Nick Baird, M.D., Director of Ohio Department of HealthCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- Med Corp., Inc. v. City of Lima and David J. Berger, Both Individually and in His Capacity as Mayor of the City of Lima, OhioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Ziegler v. AukermanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.