1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 969 F.2d
  5. 969 F.2d 63 (1992)
 

GARDNER v. CITY OF BALTIMORE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL

No. 91-1817.

969 F.2d 63 (1992)

Rodney D. GARDNER, Individually and as Custodian for the children of Ruth M. Gardner, Deceased; RMG and Associates, Incorporated, by Rodney D. Gardner, President; Vance D. Israel; Denise Israel; Shirley Avin, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF BALTIMORE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL; Larry Reich, Individually and as Director of Planning; Alfred E. Barry, III, Individually and as Chief of Current Planning; Stanley S. Fine, Individually and in his former official capacity as a member of the Planning Commission of Baltimore City; George G. Balog, Individually and as Director; Benjamin L. Brown, Individually and as City Solicitor; Ambrose T. Hartman, Individually and as Deputy City Solicitor; W. Hayes Brown, III, Individually and as Assistant City Solicitor; Mark A. Faber, Individually and as Solicitor; Frank C. Derr, Individually and as Solicitor; Ortho M. Thompson, Individually and as Solicitor, Defendants-Appellees, and Planning Commission of Baltimore City; Department of Law, Defendants.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Decided July 6, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Edward Lee Blanton, Jr., Blanton & McCleary, Towson, Md., argued, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Cyril Vincent Smith, Zuckerman, Spaeder, Goldstein, Taylor & Better, Baltimore, Md., argued (Herbert Better, on brief), for defendants-appellees.

Before WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and WILLIAMS, Senior District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

OPINION

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge:

This case involves another local land-use dispute that has landed in federal court through 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The issue presented by this litigation is strikingly familiar: appellants claim that they were denied substantive due process by the failure of various Baltimore city officials to approve proposals for residential development of particular property. We reject this claim. Because Baltimore's land-use regulations...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases