Legal Opinion
David Shoemaker v. City of Howell
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided July 29, 2015No. 13-2535PublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGilman, J., joined by Sutton, J.,
CLAY, J. (pp. 568-78), delivered a separate dissenting opinion.
OPINION
RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge.
Like many American cities, the City of Howell, Michigan requires its property owners to keep their lawns mowed below a certain height. Violators of the ordinance are charged a fine as well as a fee for the costs associated with hiring a private contractor to mow or otherwise maintain the property. David Shoemaker, then a homeowner in the City, refused to mow the area between the sidewalk and the street (the curb strip) in front of his house after the City had relandscaped the curb' strip…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Zinermon v. BurchSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Puckett v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County GovernmentCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
- Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. R.G. &. G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
- Rita Johnson v. Timothy MoralesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
- Thomas v. HaslamDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2018
- Hicks v. ColvinDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2016
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.