Case Citator › Parkway Garage, Inc. v. The City Of Philadelphia

Parkway Garage, Inc. v. The City Of Philadelphia

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Third Circuit
Citation
5 F.3d 685
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
71 of 71
Citing cases (total)
71
Treatment dates
2003
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Parkway Garage, Inc. v. The City of Philadelphia's improper-motive rule for substantive due process is no longer good law. United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc. v. Township of Warrington held that later Supreme Court authority requires government conduct that shocks the conscience.
More on how this was screened

Courts continue to cite Parkway Garage for separate rulings, including its treatment of Pennsylvania contract law and proof of a civil rights conspiracy. All 71 flagged citations have been read. The confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

71 later cases cite Parkway Garage, Inc. v. The City Of Philadelphia; 71 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Parkway Garage, Inc. v. The City Of Philadelphia?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Third Circuit held that Parkway Garage's improper-motive standard for substantive due process could not survive the Supreme Court's later shocks-the-conscience test.

    United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc. v. Township of Warrington · Third Circuit · filed

    In these cases, we held that a municipal land use decision violates substantive due process if it was made for any reason "unrelated to the merits," Herr v. Pequea Township, 274 F.3d 109, 111 (3d Cir.2001) (citing cases), or with any "improper motive." See, e.g., Woodwind Estates, Ltd. v. Gretkowski, 205 F.3d 118 (3d Cir.2000); Blanche Road Corp. v. Bensalem Township, 57 F.3d 253 (3d Cir.1995); DeBlasio v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 53 F.3d 592 (3d Cir.1995); Parkway Garage, Inc. v. City of Philadelphia, 5 F.3d 685 (3d Cir.1993); Midnight Sessions, Ltd. v. City of Philadelphia, 945 F.2d 667 (3d Cir.1991). ... These cases, however, cannot be reconciled with Lewis's explanation of substantive due process analysis. ... We thus hold that, in light of Lewis, Bello and its progeny are no longer good law.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Parkway Garage, Inc. v. The City Of Philadelphia and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace