Rupprecht v. City of Pittsfield

First Circuit

Rupprecht v. City of Pittsfield

225 F. App'x 1

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided May 31, 2007·No. No. 06-2767·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After carefully considering the briefs and record on appeal, we affirm the judgment below. McCord v. Horace Mann Ins. Co., 390 F.3d 138 (1st Cir.2004) (de novo review).

Among other problems, land-use conflicts rarely support constitutional claims. Extreme circumstances are required to support substantive due process or equal protection claims. Exhaustion of state remedies is a prerequisite for procedural due process and Fifth Amendment takings claims. SFW Arecibo, Ltd. v. Rodriguez, 415 F.3d 135 (1st Cir.2005). Appellant made no showing that he satisfied any of these requirements.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27.0(c).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

After carefully considering the briefs and record on appeal, we affirm the judgment below. McCord v. Horace Mann Ins. Co., 390 F.3d 138 (1st Cir.2004) (de novo review).

Among other problems, land-use conflicts rarely support constitutional claims. Extreme circumstances are required to support substantive due process or equal protection claims. Exhaustion of state remedies is a prerequisite for procedural due process and Fifth Amendment takings claims. SFW Arecibo, Ltd. v. Rodriguez, 415 F.3d 135 (1st Cir.2005). Appellant made no showing that he satisfied any of these requirements.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27.0(c).

Rupprecht v. City of Pittsfield, 225 F. App'x 1 (1st Cir. 2007).

Pincite

225 F. App'x 1 (Rupprecht v. City of Pittsfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related