No. 23-956
Roy Bracken, et al. v. City of Ketchum, Idaho, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: 42-usc-1983 civil-procedure civil-rights conditional-use-permit discretionary-process due-process procedural-due-process property-rights substantive-due-process
Latest Conference:
2024-04-12
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether All Rights To Due Process Required By Federal, State, And Municipal Law May Be Denied Because One Lacks Entitlement To A Government Benefit Solely Due To The Existence Of Discretion
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether All Rights To Due Process Required By Federal, State, And Municipal Law May Be Denied Because One Lacks Entitlement To A Government Benefit Solely Due To The Existence Of Discretion
Docket Entries
2024-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2024-03-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2024.
2024-03-06
Waiver of right of respondent City of Ketchum, Idaho, et al. to respond filed.
2024-01-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 3, 2024)
Attorneys
City of Ketchum, Idaho, et al.
Matthew A. Johnson — White, Peterson, Gigray & Nichols, P.A., Respondent
Roy Bracken, et al.
Robert James Elgee — Robert Elgee Law Office, Petitioner