United States Sixth Circuit

In a housing developer's suit against a town and its trustees, alleging various claims of constitutional violations, district court's grant of defendants' motion for summary judgment is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's attempt to void the Zoning Regulation for vagueness fails; 2) district court properly granted summary judgment to defendants on the FHA claim; 3) district court properly granted summary judgment to defendants on the Equal Protection claim as plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the the Zoning Regulation's prohibition against multiple-family dwellings, on its face, discriminates on the basis of race; and 4) plaintiff's substantive due process claim was properly dismissed as it did not have a protected property interest in developing its property in accordance with its development plan.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/30/2010
• Decided 06/04/2010
• Published 06/04/2010

Judges

• Before GIBBONS and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges; DOWD, Senior District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Gregory B. O'Connor, McNamee & McNamee, PLL, Beavercreek, Ohio, for Appellant. Brendan D. Healy, Surdyk, Dowd & Turner Co., L.P.A., Miamisburg, Ohio, for Appellees. ON BRIEF:Gregory B. O'Connor, Michael P. McNamee, McNamee & McNamee, PLL, Beavercreek, Ohio, for Appellant. Brendan D. Healy, Robert J. Surdyk, Surdyk, Dowd & Turner Co., L.P.A., Miamisburg, Ohio, for Appellees.