Legal Opinion

Lindsay v. City of Philadelphia

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided August 23, 1994No. Civ. A. 93-6650PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ANITA B. BRODY, District Judge.

The issue before me is whether defendant City of Philadelphia is entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ claims that a recently implemented City ordinance limiting sidewalk vending in Center City Philadelphia violated their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and Article I of the Ünited States Constitution. I will grant summary judgment on the due process and impairment of contracts claims because the plaintiffs have not shown that they hold either a protected property interest or a contractual right in their customary vending…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Washington v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySupreme Court of the United States · 1979

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Scott v. City of PittsburghCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  2. Kaehly v. City of PittsburghDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. (2001), Maryland Attorney General Reports2001
  4. Kaehly v. City of PittsburghCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. W. Ziemlewicz v. Board of License and Inspection ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API