Executive 100, Inc. v. Martin County
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partClark, Circuit Judge
I. INTRODUCTION
“Zoning provides one of the firmest and most basic of the rights of local control.” 1 And, as this court has recognized, it is “not the function of federal district courts to serve as zoning appeals boards.2
The gravamen of the court’s error in permitting appellants’ suit against the county to go forward is its willingness to engage in premature review of the actions of the local zoning authority based on almost nonexistent factual allegations of a constitutional dimension. It cannot be the ease that the role of the federal courts is to review decisions of local zoning…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- 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
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.