United States Ninth Circuit

Denial of plaintiff's re-zoning application did not violate its right to the free exercise of religion, or otherwise run afoul of the Constitution; the zoning laws in question are neutral, of general application, and do not substantially burden plaintiff's free exercise. Summary judgment for defendants is affirmed.

Appellate Information

• Argued 05/14/2003
• Decided 03/08/2004
• Published 03/08/2004

Judges

• Before CANBY, JR., KLEINFELD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• John L. Dodd (argued), Tustin, CA;  William B. Clayton, Jr., Clayton & McEvoy, P.C., San Jose, CA;  Brad Dacus, June Jantz, Pacific Justice Institute, Citrus Heights, CA, for the plaintiff-appellant., Geoffrey L. Robinson, Bingham McCutchen, LLP, Walnut Creek, CA;  Michael S. Giaimo, Robinson & Cole, LLP, Boston, Massachusetts, for amicus curiae American Planning Association., Roman P. Storzer, Kevin J. Hasson, Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., Christine Lockhart, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Washington, DC, for amici curiae The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and Various Christian, Jewish and Muslim Organizations., Amy Greyson, T. Peter Pierce, Richards, Watson & Gershon, Brea, CA, for amici curiae City of Alameda and Sixty-One Other California Cities and Towns.


• For Appellees:
  
• John A. Ramirez (argued), Jeffrey T. Melching, Rutan & Tucker, LLP, Costa Mesa, CA;  Helene L. Leichter, City Attorney, City of Morgan Hill, for the defendants-appellees.