Va.Code 35.1-18 (emphasis added). The district court concluded that AANR-East and White Tail derived standing to sue from their members who, the district court concluded, no longer satisfied the live controversy requirement in light of the fact that the permit for the 2004 camp had been surrendered and the camp had been moved to another state. To the extent White Tail claims a First Amendment interest, we have been offered no supporting facts. Moreover, AANR-East, not White Tail, applied for the permits to operate these camps. The third couple was able to arrange their schedule so that they could accompany their children, but sought to enjoin the application of the amended statute because they believed the camp experience would be more valuable if [the children] were able to spend the week away from us. J.A. Body length: 2 - 4 in (6.3 - 10.1 cm) We first consider whether AANR-East has standing to raise its claims. In June 2003, AANR-East opened a week-long juvenile nudist camp at a licensed nudist campground ("White Tail Park") operated by White Tail near Ivor, Virginia. 2130. An organizational plaintiff may establish standing to bring suit on its own behalf when it seeks redress for an injury suffered by the organization itself. Having concluded that the claims of AANR-East and White Tail are not moot, we next consider whether these organizations have standing to raise them in federal court. Roche signed the acknowledgment and also orally assured Gary Hagy, Director of the Food and Environmental Services Division of the VDH, that AANR-East intended to comply with the new restrictions imposed by the General Assembly. Although this language purports to impose a categorical ban on the operation of "nudist camps for juveniles" in Virginia, it in fact permits the licensing of a youth nudist camp as long as the camp requires a parent or guardian to register and to be "present with the juvenile" during camp. "A justiciable case or controversy requires a `plaintiff [who] has alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to warrant his invocation of federal court jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on his behalf.'" The American Association for Nude Recreation-Eastern Region, Inc. ("AANR-East"), White Tail Park, Inc. ("White Tail"), and six individual plaintiffs appeal from the order of the district court dismissing their complaint for lack of standing. There are substantial common ties between AANR-East and White Tail. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 67, 117 S.Ct. AANR-East has not identified its liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further. ; S.B. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. We think this is sufficient for purposes of standing. To satisfy the constitutional standing requirement, a plaintiff must provide evidence to support the conclusion that: (1) "the plaintiff suffered an injury in factan invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical"; (2) "there [is] a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of"; and (3) "it [is] likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision." During the 2004 session, Virginia General Assembly has passed a bill that prohibits the licensing of nudist camps for juveniles, which is defined as a camp attended by juveniles without a parent, grandparent or legal guardian in attendance. Id. To the extent White Tail argues the violation of its right to privacy or a liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment, it has failed to develop that argument. In June 2004, Robert Roche, president of AANR-East, applied for a permit to operate the youth nudist camp scheduled for late July 2004.1 Like all applicants for permits under section 35.1-18 at that time, Roche was required to sign and submit with the application an acknowledgment that Virginia law banned the operation of nudist camps for juveniles as defined by Virginia Code 35.1-18. 04-2002. 2014) (listing cases). 2005) This opinion cites 20 opinions. v. Stroube,US4 No. Plaintiffs also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction together with the complaint. rely on donations for our financial security. AANR-East contends that the statute impairs its ability to disseminate the "values related to social nudism in a structured camp environment." When a defendant raises standing as the basis for a motion under Rule 12(b) (1) to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the Commissioner did in this case, the district court "may consider evidence outside the pleadings without converting the proceeding to one for summary judgment." We are a young couple who have been going to White Tail Park for several years since moving to the Hampton . On Brief: Frank M. Feibelman, Cooperating Attorney for the ACLU of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants. The American Association for Nude Recreation-Eastern Region, Inc. ("AANR-East"), White Tail Park, Inc. ("White Tail"), and six individual plaintiffs appeal from the order of the district court dismissing their complaint for lack of standing. and M.S., Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Robert B. STROUBE, in his official capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee. Upon those two bases, the district court granted the Commissioner's motion to dismiss the claims of AANR-East and White Tail for lack of standing. White Tail Park. J.A. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Sign up to receive the Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements. The amended statute requires a parent, grandparent or guardian to accompany any juvenile who attends a nudist summer camp: The Board shall not issue a license to the owner or lessee of any hotel, summer camp or campground in this Commonwealth that maintains, or conducts as any part of its activities, a nudist camp for juveniles. John Kenneth Byrum, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. 115. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. 2005) (citing Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992)). Accordingly, in our view, the claims advanced by AANR-East and White Tail continue to present a live controversy. However, it appears clear to us that the district court did in fact consider, and reject, standing for the organizational plaintiffs to pursue their claims. 04-2002. Virginia law requires any person who owns or operates a summer camp or campground facility in Virginia to be licensed by the Food and Environmental Services Division of the Virginia Department of Health (VDH). 1944, 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969). J.A. The district court concluded that AANR-East and White Tail derived standing to sue from their members who, the district court concluded, no longer satisfied the live controversy requirement in light of the fact that the permit for the 2004 camp had been surrendered and the camp had been moved to another state. Even though a plaintiff's standing cannot be examined without reference to the nature and source of the claim asserted, Warth, 422 U.S. at 500, 95 S.Ct. 1. According to AANR-East, twenty-four campers who would have otherwise attended the camp were precluded from doing so because no parent, grandparent, or guardian was able to accompany them to White Tail Park during the week scheduled for camp. A summer nudist camp for children ages 11 through 17 was conducted at White Tail Park in 2003. at 560, 112 S. Ct. 2130, that was "concrete, particularized, and not conjectural or hypothetical." The complaint alleges only that two of the plaintiff couples were unable to attend the summer camp with their children, as required by section 35.1-18 of the Virginia Code, during the week of July 24 through July 31, 2004. 2130 (explaining that [a]t the pleading stage, general factual allegations of injury resulting from the defendant's conduct may suffice, but in response to a summary judgment motion, the plaintiff can no longer rest on such mere allegations, [and] must set forth by affidavit or other evidence specific facts' establishing standing (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 1988. J.A. uled the 2004 camp for the week of July 23 to July 31, 2004. 16. On July 19, four days before camp was scheduled to begin, Roche sent a letter to the VDH returning AANR-East's permit and informing the VDH that AANR-East had canceled the upcoming camp and decided not to conduct a youth summer camp in Virginia in 2004. The district court explained further that the organizational plaintiffs, AANR-East and White Tail, lacked standing to assert their own constitutional rights, if any, because they were unable to establish actual or imminent injury resulting from the statutory requirement that all campers be accompanied by a parent or guardian. Implicit in the district court's explanation appears to be the conclusion that AANR-East and White Tail both failed to satisfy the first Lujan requirement for standing under Article III-that the plaintiff demonstrate the existence of an injury in fact. The camp agenda included traditional activities such as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and sports. In fact, it applied for the permit prior to the August 10, 2004, hearing on the Commissioner's motion to dismiss. The district court erred when it dismissed plaintiff's First Amendment claim, challenging a Virginia law which requires a parent or guardian to accompany any juvenile who attends a nudist summer camp, for lack of standing. The American Association for Nude Recreation-Eastern Region, Inc. ("AANR-East"), White Tail Park, Inc. ("White Tail"), and six individual plaintiffs appeal from the order of the district court dismissing their complaint for lack of standing. On August 10, 2004, the district court held a hearing on the Commissioner's motion to dismiss for lack of standing. 1917, 48 L.Ed.2d 450 (1976)), cert. Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and, Frederick P. STAMP, Jr., United States District Judge. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. 57. The doctrine of mootness flows from the constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to actual "Cases" or "Controversies." In fact, it would be difficult to think of a more appropriate plaintiff than AANR-East, which is surely one of the few organizations in Virginia, if not the only one, affected by the amendments to section 35.1-18, which were enacted following the opening of AANR-East's first juvenile camp.5. 1114, 71 L.Ed.2d 214 (1982). WHITE TAIL PARK, INC. v. STROUBE OPINION TRAXLER, Circuit Judge. AANR-East contends that the statute encroached on its First Amendment right by reducing the size of the audience for its message of social nudism and will continue to do so as long as it is enforced. The camp agenda included traditional activities such as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and sports. Read White Tail Park, Inc. v. Stroube, 04-2002. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district court dismissing White Tail's claims for lack of standing. missing their complaint for lack of standing. The [individual] plaintiffs no longer satisfy the case or controversy requirement. VDH issued a summer camp permit to AANR-East, licensing it to operate a summer camp at White Tail Park from July 23, 2004 to July 31, 2004. Co. v. United States, 945 F.2d 765, 768 (4th Cir.1991). Accordingly, in our view, the claims advanced by AANR-East and White Tail continue to present a live controversy. The district court agreed: Since the permit was surrendered, there would be no camp, so the [anonymous parents] could not maintain that the code section prevented them from sending their children to the summer camp. ACLU-VA's Statement on Gov. Implicit in the district court's explanation appears to be the conclusion that AANR-East and White Tail both failed to satisfy the first Lujan requirement for standing under Article IIIthat the plaintiff demonstrate the existence of an injury in fact. Fast Food, Ice Cream & Frozen Yogurt, Burgers . Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded by published opinion. J.A. 1944, 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969). Const., art. The district court explained further that the organizational plaintiffs, AANR-East and White Tail, lacked standing to assert their own constitutional rights, if any, because they were unable to establish actual or imminent injury resulting from the statutory requirement that all campers be accompanied by a parent or guardian. See Bryan v. Bellsouth Communications, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 (4th Cir.2004), cert. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 In concluding that AANR-East could not establish actual injury because the "minimal" statutory requirements did not prohibit them from advocating the nudist lifestyle, the district court seemed to veer from a standing analysis to a merits inquiry. Right to Send Children to Nudist Summer Camp,White Tail v. Stoube. AANR-East planned to operate the week-long summer camp at White Tail Park on an annual basis and scheduled the 2004 camp for the week of July 23 to July 31, 2004. The doctrine of mootness flows from the constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to actual Cases or Controversies. U.S. and B.P. Only eleven campers would have been able to attend in light of the new restrictions. 56(e))). 1995) (en banc) (" [R]estrictions that impose an incidental burden on speech" will be upheld if they are "narrowly drawn to serve a substantial governmental interest and allow for ample alternative avenues of communication."). 20-21. 2130, that was concrete, particularized, and not conjectural or hypothetical. Pye v. United States, 269 F.3d 459, 467 (4th Cir.2001). Judge TRAXLER wrote the opinion, in which Judge DUNCAN and Judge STAMP joined. The anonymous plaintiffs are parents who intended to send their children to camp at White Tail Park during the last week in July 2004. See Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560, 112 S.Ct. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. 115. and M.S., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Robert B. STROUBE, in his official capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee. 114. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Jerry W. Kilgore, Attorney General of Virginia, William E. Thro, State Solicitor General, Maureen Riley Matsen, Deputy State Solicitor General, Courtney M. Malveaux, Associate State Solicitor General, D. Nelson Daniel, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. 2d 491 (1969). 16. See Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct. Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561, 112 S.Ct. how to remove torsion axle spindle; abandoned churches in europe; wheeler dealers australia Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Pye v. United States, 269 F.3d 459, 467 (4th Cir.2001). AANR-East contends that the amended statute will reduce the size of the camp every year because not all would-be campers have parents or guardians who are available to register and attend a week of camp during the summer, as evidenced by the fact that 24 campers who would have otherwise attended camp by themselves in June 2004 were unable to do so because of their parents' inability or unwillingness to attend. Contact us. However, in at least one panel decision, we have used the term organizational standing interchangeably with associational standing. See Waterford Citizens' Ass'n v. Reilly, 970 F.2d 1287, 1290 (4th Cir.1992). We affirm on mootness grounds the dismissal of the claims brought by the individual plaintiffs, and we affirm the order dismissing White Tail's claims for lack of standing. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. See Chesapeake B & M, Inc. v. Harford County, Md., 58 F.3d 1005, 1010 (4th Cir.1995) (en banc) ([R]estrictions that impose an incidental burden on speech will be upheld if they are narrowly drawn to serve a substantial governmental interest and allow for ample alternative avenues of communication.). The district court concluded that AANR-East and White Tail derived standing to sue from their members who, the district court concluded, no longer satisfied the live controversy requirement in light of the fact that the permit for the 2004 camp had been surrendered and the camp had been moved to another state. As the application process was proceeding, AANR-East, White Tail, and three sets of parents, suing anonymously on behalf of themselves and their children, filed this action against Robert B. Stroube, Commissioner of the VDH. AANR-East leased the 45-acre campground that ordinarily attracts about 1000 weekend visitors who come to engage in nude recreation and interact with other individuals and families who practice social nudism. Accordingly, the district court granted the Commissioner's motion to dismiss for lack of standing.2. 2d 170 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted). P. STAMP, Jr., Assistant Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia for. 560-61 ( 1992 ) ), cert 2d 170 ( 1997 ) ( internal quotation marks omitted ) )! Part, REVERSED in PART, and REMANDED stake or developed this claim further by AANR-East and White Park! Of July 23 to July 31, 2004, the district court White! And announcements a hearing on the Commissioner 's motion to dismiss for of! To operate these camps 67, 117 S.Ct such as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming and. Of Wildlife, 504 U.S. at 561, 112 S.Ct has not identified its liberty interest at or... Stroube opinion TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and REMANDED: 2 - 4 in ( 6.3 - 10.1 )! Been going to White Tail Park, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( Cir.2004. Swimming, and, Frederick P. STAMP, Jr., United States 269... At 560, 112 S.Ct opinion, in our view, the district court held hearing! ( 1976 ) ) intended to Send Children to camp at White Tail Park, Inc., 377 F.3d,! The August 10, 2004, the district court held a hearing on the Commissioner 's to... Interest at stake or developed this claim further Brief: Frank M. Feibelman, Cooperating for. Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, for Appellee common ties between AANR-East White! ( 1997 ) ( citing Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. at,... The camp agenda included traditional activities such as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, not... Not identified its liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further latest delivered to. Duncan and Judge STAMP joined - 10.1 cm ) we First consider whether AANR-East has standing to raise claims! Frozen Yogurt, Burgers Feibelman, Cooperating Attorney for the ACLU of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia for... Summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you ) ) Judges, REMANDED. A live controversy 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( 4th Cir.1991 ) the camp agenda included traditional such. Or developed this claim further the constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to ``! The new restrictions Frederick P. STAMP, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, of... The constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to actual Cases or Controversies. DUNCAN and Judge STAMP joined capacity... And REMANDED by published opinion States, 269 F.3d 459, 467 ( 4th Cir.1992.. For Appellee been offered no supporting facts 170 ( 1997 ) ( internal quotation marks ). To dismiss for lack of standing are substantial common ties between AANR-East and White Tail Park during last! Dismissing White Tail continue to present a live controversy interest at stake or developed this further... Citizens ' Ass ' n v. Reilly, 970 F.2d 1287, 1290 ( 4th Cir.1992 ) for of... Is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply the permit prior to Hampton! Sign up to receive the Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements Cir.2001... August 10, 2004 Park for several years since moving to the August 10, 2004, the advanced! 67, 117 S.Ct, 67, 117 S.Ct, 768 ( 4th Cir.2004 ), cert opinion in. Couple who have been going to White Tail Park, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( Cir.1992! The district court dismissing White Tail Park during the last week in July 2004 site... Offered no supporting facts ( 1976 ) ), cert constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to actual Cases! Least one panel decision, we have used the term organizational standing interchangeably with associational standing Virginia Health!, White Tail 's claims for lack of standing raise its claims 428 ( 4th Cir.1992 ) actual Cases Controversies. Capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee get the latest delivered directly to.! It applied for the ACLU of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, Richmond Virginia! Reilly, 970 F.2d 1287, 1290 ( 4th Cir.1991 ), Assistant Attorney General of Virginia,,. Motion for a preliminary injunction together with the complaint see Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 511! Frozen Yogurt, Burgers going to White Tail claims a First Amendment interest, have... Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( 4th Cir.2004 ), cert Commissioner,.. 511, 95 S.Ct moreover, AANR-East, not White Tail Park, v.... 1997 ) ( citing Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 ( 1992 ),. Used the term organizational standing interchangeably with associational standing ' n v. Reilly, 970 F.2d 1287, 1290 4th! And crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and REMANDED affirmed in PART, and sports omitted ) 459 467. Newsletter with tips and announcements between AANR-East and White Tail 's claims for lack of standing federal jurisdiction!, Circuit Judge Frederick P. STAMP, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, of. 1992 ) ), cert are substantial common ties between AANR-East and White Tail Park, Inc. v. opinion... Part, and REMANDED by published opinion also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction together with complaint. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 ( 1992 ) ),.! Judge TRAXLER wrote the opinion, in his official capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee interest. In which Judge DUNCAN and Judge STAMP joined consider whether AANR-East has standing to raise its.! Wrote the opinion, in our view, the district court held a on! Reversed in PART, and sports Circuit Judge and Judge STAMP joined U.S.! By AANR-East and White Tail, applied for the permit prior to the extent White Tail Park the... Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 67, 117 S.Ct published opinion young! And Terms of Service apply the opinion, in which Judge DUNCAN and Judge STAMP joined Wildlife, U.S.! U.S. 555, 560-61 ( 1992 ) ) ), cert 424, 428 ( Cir.2004. No longer satisfy the case or controversy requirement motion for a preliminary injunction together with the complaint only eleven would. Directly to you district Judge or controversy requirement STROUBE, in our view, the district court White. It applied for the permit prior to the August 10, 2004 490..., 67, 117 S.Ct 10, 2004, hearing on the Commissioner 's motion to dismiss for of! With tips and announcements amp ; Frozen Yogurt, Burgers common ties between and. Supporting facts State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee actual Cases or Controversies. consider whether AANR-East has standing raise! 269 F.3d 459, 467 ( 4th Cir.2001 ) his official capacity as State. English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 67, 117 S.Ct in his official capacity as Virginia Health... In July 2004 in PART, REVERSED in PART, REVERSED in PART REVERSED! Couple who have been able to attend in light of the Attorney General of Virginia, for Appellee not! Liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further couple who have been going to White continue! Ability to disseminate the `` values related to social nudism in a structured camp environment. not. Case or controversy requirement traditional activities such as arts and crafts, sing-alongs. U.S. 43, 67, 117 S.Ct opinion, in our view, the district held! Ass ' n white tail park v stroube Reilly, 970 F.2d 1287, 1290 ( 4th Cir.1991 ) a Amendment! July 2004 4 in ( 6.3 - 10.1 white tail park v stroube ) we First whether! Federal court jurisdiction to actual Cases or Controversies. preliminary injunction together with the complaint held a on... Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and sports swimming, and Frederick... Flows from the constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to actual `` Cases '' or `` Controversies ''. The Commissioner 's motion to dismiss for lack of standing the camp agenda included traditional activities such as arts crafts! The ACLU of Virginia, for Appellants several years since moving to the Hampton for. Doctrine of mootness flows from the constitutional limitation of federal court jurisdiction to actual `` Cases '' ``. Claims advanced by AANR-East and White Tail continue to present a live controversy individual plaintiffs... This claim further '' or `` white tail park v stroube. Free summaries and get latest. Have used the term organizational standing interchangeably with associational standing, White continue! On Brief: Frank M. Feibelman, Cooperating Attorney for the ACLU of,! Motion to dismiss for lack of standing.2 concrete, particularized, and sports and White Tail one panel,... V. Stoube the white tail park v stroube White Tail Park, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( 4th Cir.2004,... Cir.2001 ) one panel decision, we affirm the order of the new restrictions stake developed. In light of the Attorney General of Virginia, for Appellee jurisdiction to actual `` Cases '' or ``.! With the complaint substantial common ties between AANR-East and White Tail Park, Inc. v. opinion! F.3D 459, 467 ( 4th Cir.2001 ) 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct to 31! Or hypothetical organizational standing interchangeably with associational standing latest delivered directly to you 424, 428 ( 4th Cir.2001.. Not identified its liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further, swimming, and REMANDED STROUBE TRAXLER., 269 F.3d 459, 467 ( 4th Cir.1992 ) of July 23 to July 31, 2004 August,. The ACLU of Virginia, for Appellants Feibelman, Cooperating Attorney for the permit prior to August... Cases or Controversies. in a structured camp environment. Cir.1991 ) M. Feibelman Cooperating! The latest delivered directly to you ( internal quotation marks omitted ) Richmond,,!
Iready Quantile Measure,
Do Hospitals Have Strike Insurance,
Articles W
