Legal Opinion

Clayton v. Village of Oak Park

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided August 30, 1983No. 82-2168PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hartman

The intended purpose of the ordinance challenged here is “to insure the single-family residences in the village of Oak Park against the possibility of economic loss, and thereby help to eliminate irrational fears of racial change,” and to assure owners that their properties will not deteriorate in value as a result of projected racial changes in the community. A declaratory judgment action was brought by certain owners of nonqualifying properties within the village attacking the validity of the ordinance. The respective parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings. Judgment was…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Salyer Land Co. v. Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. People v. LutzIllinois Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Butterworth v. BoydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. National Realty & Investment Co. v. Department of RevenueAppellate Court of Illinois · 1986
  2. City of Chicago v. KorshakAppellate Court of Illinois · 1995
  3. City of Elmhurst Ex Rel. Mastrino v. City of ElmhurstAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994
  4. Searle Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Department of RevenueAppellate Court of Illinois · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API