Acorn v. St. Louis County

3 Citing cases

  1. Fernandez v. St. Louis Cnty.

    461 F. Supp. 3d 894 (E.D. Mo. 2020)   Cited 2 times
    Finding that a law banning people from "stand[ing] in a roadway for the purpose of soliciting a ride, employment, charitable contribution or business from the occupant of any vehicle" was content based

    SeeAshley Cty., Ark. v. Pfizer, Inc. , 552 F.3d 659, 665 (8th Cir. 2009). "Judgement on the pleadings is appropriate only when there is no dispute as to any material facts and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Id. The County's arguments focus heavily on Ass'n of Cmty. Organizations for Reform Now ("ACORN") v. St. Louis Cty. , 726 F. Supp. 747 (E.D. Mo. 1989), aff'd , 930 F.2d 591 (8th Cir. 1991), in which, according to the County, Section 1209.090 was "definitively upheld by this Court and by the Eighth Circuit." Thus, the argument goes, ACORN is "stare decisis as to this particular ordinance" so that plaintiff's complaint "leaves no [factual] dispute" and instead "establish[es] defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."

  2. Acorn v. St. Louis County

    930 F.2d 591 (8th Cir. 1991)   Cited 44 times
    Holding an ordinance proscribing solicitation easily survives the test of whether the County reasonably determined that its interests overall would be served less effectively without the regulation

    JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. This case presents a first amendment challenge to a traffic code provision prohibiting solicitation in the roadways of St. Louis County, brought by ACORN, a nonprofit advocacy organization, and one of its members, against St. Louis County, Missouri, its Superintendent of Police and its Director of Revenue. After a bench trial, the district court held that the challenged regulation is a permissible time, place and manner restriction serving the government's interest in safety and traffic efficiency and entered judgment for St. Louis County. Association of Community Organization for Reform Now v. St. Louis County, 726 F. Supp. 747 (E.D.Mo. 1989). ACORN appeals, arguing that its method of in-the-roadway solicitation is safe, and that St. Louis County could have achieved its desired result in a less restrictive manner.

  3. Mills v. St. Louis Cnty. Gov't

    Case No. 4:17cv00257 PLC (E.D. Mo. Oct. 23, 2017)   Cited 1 times

    There is no dispute that the County is a political subdivision of the State of Missouri. See Association of Cmty. Orgs. for Reform Now v. St. Louis Cty., 726 F. Supp. 747, 749 (E.D. Mo. 1989). The ADA allows an individual "alleging [intentional employment] discrimination on the basis of disability" under the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), to recover compensatory and punitive damages in addition to other authorized relief.