Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Marks v. City of Chesapeake

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
883 F.2d 308 (1989)


Facts

Steven Marks (plaintiff) sought for his residential property to be rezoned for commercial use so that he could operate a palmistry business. The City of Chesapeake (the city) (defendant) approved the zoning change through the city council but informed Marks that the city’s licensing ordinance further required Marks to obtain a conditional-use permit to operate a palmistry. Marks applied for the permit. No members of the public opposed, and the Chesapeake City Planning Commission approved the permit. However, when Marks sought final approval from the city council, some local residents for the first time voiced their opposition to the palmistry business based on religious grounds. After hearing this opposition, the city council denied Marks’s permit. Marks brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief and compensatory and punitive damages on the ground that the city had violated his substantive due-process rights. Marks argued that the denial of the permit was arbitrary and capricious and thus a deprivation of property without due process of law. At trial, two members of the city council testified that the religious opposition had swayed their decision. The planning director testified that there would have been no adverse effects to the neighborhood from the palmistry business. The district court found for Marks, holding that the city had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying the permit. The city appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Phillips, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.