Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Jay Nygard, et ux. v. City of Orono, Minnesota
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 21-2941 · judgment July 5, 2022
Before the decision, about 2.8× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel with five or more prior petitions here, a circuit split argued in the petition, and an Eighth Circuit decision below, and down for a state or local-government respondent.
Questions presented
Petitioners brought a pre-enforcement void-forvagueness challenge to a city permitting ordinance that is criminally enforceable for every type of home repair. The Eighth Circuit opined that facial vagueness challenges are not permitted outside the First Amendment cases, citing United States v. Orchard, 332 F.3d 1133 (8th Cir. 2003). There exists a split in the circuits and Supreme Court precedent. Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972). Under Desertrain v. City of Los Angeles, 754 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2014), preenforcement actions challenging ordinances on vagueness grounds are allowed. The questions presented are:
-
Can a homeowner prevail on a Papachristou-based pre-enforcement challenge to a municipal permitting law?
-
Can a criminally enforceable city ordinance be challenged as unconstitutionally vague outside a First Amendment claim?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Erick G. Kaardal
Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson P.A.
For respondent
John S. Brooksbank
Campbell Knutson, P.A.
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Nov 21 2022Petition DENIED.
- Nov 02 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/18/2022.
- Oct 21 2022Waiver of right of respondent City of Orono, a Minnesota Municipality to respond filed.
- Oct 03 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 4, 2022)