This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Civil Rights
First Amendment
Spiritual Counseling

Stephanie Davis v. City of Selma, Myron Dyck, D-B Heusser

Published: Jul. 19, 2014 | Result Date: Jul. 3, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1:12-cv-01362-AWI-MJS Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Eastern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Ovidio Oviedo


Defendant

Neal E. Costanzo
(Costanzo & Associates)


Facts

Stephanie Davis sued the City of Selma, Myron Dyck, and D-B Heusser, in connection with a local ordinance that made "fortune telling" unlawful in the city.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Davis claimed that she was a fortuneteller within the meaning of the local ordinance, and that the ordinance required her to obtain a license in order to provide such services within the city. Davis contended that the city's licensing requirements were unduly burdensome, intrusive, and restrictive. Davis asserted causes of action for violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, violations of the Religious Land use and Institutionalized Persons Act, and violation of the California Constitution's freedom of speech and expression.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants moved to dismiss Davis' complaint because her claims were not yet ripe for adjudication, therefore, the court lacked of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants also contended that Davis failed to state a claim of constitutional violation or a violation of the Religious Land use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Result

The court agreed that Davis' claims were not yet ripe because she has not shown intent or a concrete plan to violate the local ordinance given that she just decided to abandon the licensing process. Moreover, she had not been subjected to any threat of enforcement, nor has the ordinance she complained of ever been enforced against anyone. The court dismissed Davis' federal claims, and the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her state law cause of action, effectively disposing of her entire suit.


#83042

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390