October Term 2002 · Docket 01-1269
Can a city pay damages for delaying permits during a referendum?
A housing group claims a city broke the law by withholding permits during a citizen vote.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Nager argued the lower court found the city liable for damages.
Mr. Nager stated the city withheld permits during a referendum.
Mr. Salmons argued the city charter caused the delay.
Mr. Kramer stated the group waived a specific certified claim.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 5-7
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The city argues its charter rules caused the delay. The group argues the city acted unlawfully.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 21, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 5-7
What each side wants
The city wants the lower court finding of liability overturned.
The group wants the lower court finding of liability kept in place.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
What each side says
The city argues its neutral charter rules caused the delay.
The group argues the city unlawfully denied its building permit.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case was submitted.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 5-7
Why it matters
This case defines when local governments pay for permit delays. It affects how cities handle citizen votes on housing projects.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 5-7
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-31 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 27-45 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 27-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 15-3 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 15-3
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.