Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Nicholas Honchariw v. County of Stanislaus, California, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 21-15801 · judgment February 22, 2022
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
Whether Knick v. Township of Scott, 139 S.Ct. 2162 (2019) and Pakdel v. City and Cty. of San Francisco, 141 S.Ct. 2226 (2021) have sanctioned a pervasive misunderstanding of the finality ripeness requirement established by Williamson County Regional Planning Commission et al. v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Nicholas James Honchariw
Attorney-at-Law
For respondent
Matthew D. Zinn
Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Oct 03 2022Petition DENIED.
- Jun 29 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
- Jun 21 2022Waiver of right of respondent County of Stanislaus, et al. to respond filed.
- May 20 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 23, 2022)