Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-04282/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-04282-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

REDWOOD CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C-01-4282 SC 

ORDER DENYING

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION

FOR LEAVE TO FILE

MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

On August 29, 2006, this Court issued an Order Granting in

Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary

Judgment and Denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary

Judgment ("Order"). On September 7, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a

Motion requesting the Court to review that portion of the Order

denying summary judgment on Plaintiffs' federal unbridled

discretion claim. The Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion for

Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration.

This case does not fit within the parameters of relevant

precedent in which courts have invalidated zoning ordinances based

on the unbridled discretion doctrine. Those cases apply the

unbridled discretion doctrine when the ordinance on its face

regulates expressive conduct. See FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas,

493 U.S. 215, 225 (1990) ("the scheme involved here is more

onerous with respect to sexually oriented businesses than with

Case 3:01-cv-04282-SC Document 239 Filed 09/18/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

respect to the vast majority of other businesses") and City of

Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., 486 U.S. 750, 759-60

(1988) ("The law must have a close enough nexus to expression, or

to conduct commonly associated with expression, to pose a real and

substantial threat of the identified censorship risks. . . . A

second feature of the licensing system at issue here is that it is

directed narrowly and specifically at expression or conduct

commonly associated with expression: the circulation of

newspapers."). The ordinance in this case is one of general

application, making the unbridled discretion doctrine

inapplicable. 

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 18, 2006 

SAMUEL CONTI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:01-cv-04282-SC Document 239 Filed 09/18/06 Page 2 of 2