Brown v. City Of Upper Arlington

637 F.3d 668 (6th Cir. 2011)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

In front of P's house, next to a public street, once stood a 40-year-old sweetgum tree. The tree was on D's property. D told P that the tree was decayed and dying. D planned to remove the tree and would replace the old tree with a new one. P asked for a hearing to contest the tree's removal. P claimed that the tree was just fine and that D had no basis for taking it down. The Tree Commission denied P's appeal. D wrote P saying it would remove the tree. P filed a complaint in state court, claiming that the tree cutting would violate his rights under the substantive due process and equal protection guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment and under a D ordinance. He asked for a temporary restraining order, which the state court granted. D removed the action to federal court based on federal-question jurisdiction. The court rejected P's federal claim on the merits and opted not to resolve the state claim. The court also rejected P's request for a preliminary injunction. The court entered a final judgment dismissing the case. That same day, P's lawyer told D it would refile the complaint in state court no later than Friday, October 31. The next morning, D cut the tree down. P moved for reconsideration in the district court and for a finding that D was in contempt of court. The court denied the motion for reconsideration. Under its inherent power, the court granted the contempt motion, finding that d 'intentionally destroyed the Tree the preservation of which was the subject of the litigation,' and that D's actions foreclosed the possibility of meaningful review by any court. The court ordered F to replace the tree with 'one of comparable genus' and to pay the attorney's fees incurred by P in filing the contempt motion. D appealed.