Legal Opinion
Calvin L. Gunkel and Mildred A. Gunkel v. City of Emporia, Kansas and Russell Schoenberger
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided December 29, 1987No. 86-1891PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEPHEN H. ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs/Appellants Calvin and Mildred Gunkel (“the Gunkels”) brought a 42 U.S. C. § 1983 (1982) action along with pendent state claims against the city of Emporia, Kansas, and Russell Schoenberger, the city’s zoning coordinator (collectively “Em-poria”). The district court granted Empo-ria’s motion for summary judgement on the section 1983 claim and dismissed the state law claims. 1 For the reasons below we affirm that judgment. 2
I
Emporia zoning regulations require that every city lot have frontage on a city street. Further, lots must have specified…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Jacobs, Visconsi & Jacobs, Co. v. City of LawrenceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Lockyer v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Snyder v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Setliff v. Memorial Hospital of Sheridan CountyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- Breneric Associates v. City of Del MarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.