United States Third Circuit

In a methadone clinic's and patients' facial and as-applied challenge to a Pennsylvania statute that facially singles out methadone clinics and gave defendant-city the opportunity to vote to deny the clinic a permit to locate a facility in the city, summary judgment for the city is reversed where: 1) the statute is facially invalid under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act; 2) a remand was required for consideration of whether the individual plaintiffs' drug use posed a "real ongoing problem", for purposes of their standing under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act; 3) an Equal Protection challenge should also be considered if they do, in fact, lack standing; and 4) the district court's denial of a motion for class certification was not properly supported.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/15/2007
• Published 06/15/2007

Judges

• Before:  SMITH and ROTH, Circuit Judges, and IRENAS, District Judge.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Michael Churchill, Barbara E. Ransom (argued), Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Steven K. Ludwig (argued), Fox Rothschild, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellees.