Inc. v. Kay R.I.S.E.
Significance, The King And Queen Landfill Dilemma, Community Mobilization, Impact, Further Readings
Plaintiff
Residents Involved in Saving the Environment, Inc., and others
Defendant
King and Queen County Board of Supervisors consisting of five members: R. A. Kay, Jr., R. H. Bourne, J. R. Walton, R. F. Alsop, and W. L. Hickman
Plaintiff's Claim
That placing a landfill in a predominantly African American area results in a racially disproportionate impact and violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
Chief Lawyer for Plaintiff
Sa'ad El-Amin
Chief Defense Lawyer
John Granville Douglass
Judge
Richard L. Williams (writing for the court)
Place
Richmond, Virginia
Date of Decision
21 June 1991
Decision
Ruled in favor of the Virginia county and allowed the project to proceed by finding that the racially disproportionate impact was not intentional.
Related Cases
- Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926).
- Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229 (1976).
- Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp., 429 U.S. 252 (1977).
Additional topics
- R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul - Fighting Words, The Lower Court's Rule, The Supreme Court Rules, Further Readings
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey - Significance, Win Some, Lose Some, The Dark Horse, Massachusetts's Abortion Consent Act
- Inc. v. Kay R.I.S.E. - Significance
- Inc. v. Kay R.I.S.E. - Further Readings
- Inc. v. Kay R.I.S.E. - The King And Queen Landfill Dilemma
- Inc. v. Kay R.I.S.E. - Community Mobilization
- Inc. v. Kay R.I.S.E. - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994