Ashford

Ashford v. City of Brownsville

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 6, 202423-2804California1,118 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 6 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GAYLE ASHFORD, No. 23-2804 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellant, 6:19-cv-01540-IM v.

MEMORANDUM*

CITY OF BROWNSVILLE, a municipal corporation of Oregon; SCOTT MCDOWELL, City Administrator,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Karin J. Immergut, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 3, 2024** Portland, Oregon

Before: CALLAHAN, NGUYEN, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff-Appellant Gayle Ashford (“Ashford”) applied to the Planning

Commission of Defendant City of Brownsville (the “City”) for a conditional use

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). permit to expand her medical marijuana business to include recreational marijuana

sales. Defendant Scott McDowell (“McDowell”), the City…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.