Legal Opinion
Hinesburg Sand & Gravel, Co. v. Chittenden Solid Waste District
District Court, D. Vermont
Decided April 3, 1997No. 2:95-cv-00208PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SESSIONS, District Judge.
This suit arises out of a condemnation proceeding initiated by Defendant Chitten-den Solid Waste District (“CSWD,” “the District”) against land owned by Plaintiff Hinesburg Sand & Gravel (“HS&G”). HS&G alleges that CSWD and several of its employees and executive officers failed to follow statutory condemnation procédures and thereby violated HS&G’s rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988; Chapter I, Articles 2, 4 and 9 of the Vermont Constitution; and under Vermont- common law. Pending…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- City of New Orleans v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Philip Morris, Incorporated v. Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General of Massachusetts, United States Tobacco Company v. L. Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General of MassachusettsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Asarco Inc. v. Department of EcologyWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- Vermont Assembly of Home Health Agencies, Inc. v. ShalalaDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 1998
- Neuenswander v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 2006
- Phillip Morris, Inc. v. HarshbargerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.