Legal Opinion

Paul McMichael and Joseph A. Nichelini v. County of Napa and Napa County Board of Supervisors

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 16, 1983No. 81-4582PublishedCited by 69 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALLACE, Circuit Judge:

Paul McMichael and Joseph A. Nichelini (McMichael) brought suit to challenge the countywide vote on Initiative Measure A, a slow-growth ordinance applying only to the unincorporated area of Napa County, California. This is an appeal from the district judge’s order dismissing McMichael’s complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The district court’s jurisdiction was based on 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Our jurisdiction rests on 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm the dismissal, but for a different reason…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by69 opinions

  1. Keith v. VolpeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
  2. Los Angeles County Bar Ass'n v. EuCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  3. Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2017
  4. Olagues v. RussonielloCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  5. Preston v. HecklerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984

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

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

Powered by the Exa API