Walters Julius Washington v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a party forfeits an argument made “in a perfunctory manner unaccompanied by some effort at developed argument” (quotation marks omitted)
• noting that “violations of state law do not ‘automatically translate into a deprivation of procedural due process under the United States Constitution’”
• holding a township’s enactment of zoning instructions constituted an “established state procedure”
• requiring parties to prove that the state did not afford “adequate procedural rights” before depriving them of a life, liberty, or property interest
• requiring parties to prove that the state did not afford “adequate procedural rights” before depriving them of a life, liberty, or property interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause
• “‘The test for mootness is whether the relief sought would, if granted, make a difference to the legal interest of the parties.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).