Cunney v. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF VILLAGE OF GRAND VIEW

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “section E ... provides no standard that can be objectively applied to determine if the conduct at issue ... complies with the ordinance’s restrictions”
• recognizing that “a statute’s language may be so vague as to deny due process of law” if it, (1) “fails to provide people of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to understand what conduct it prohibits,” or (2
• holding that the defendant’s actions and admissions “demonstrate that no explicit standards exist regarding the method with which to measure from the easterly side of River Road,” and therefore “could encourage potentially arbitrary or ad hoc enforcement”
• finding that section E “fail[ed] to give specific notice of how a permit applicant should design his site plan so that the proposed building complies with th[e] restriction”
• noting that substantive due process does not apply to “government action that is incorrect or ill advised”
• characterizing Col-lazuol’s July 2007 and October 2007 letters as concluding that the house complied with section E

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).