682 F.3d 735
8th Cir.2012Background
- Aamodts sued Norfork, Arkansas to enjoin the 2008 short-term rental ordinance and sought records under AFOIA.
- District court granted summary judgment for City; Eighth Circuit reviews de novo and in light of factual inferences.
- Arkansas 1995 zoning ordinance required filing with Recorder; 2008 ordinance adopted by a City Council majority vote.
- City Clerk filed the ordinance; County Recorder filing was not made, raising procedural concerns.
- Dissent argued the City violated its own filing procedures by not recording with the County Recorder.
- Majority held the 2008 ordinance valid; dissent would reverse for failure to file with Recorder.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of 2008 ordinance given filing; | Aamodts: lacked proper filing; amendment requires Recorder filing. | City: amendment valid by majority vote; filing requirement not mandatory for amendments. | Ordinance valid; majority vote sufficed under statute. |
| AFOIA claim and constitutional challenge preserved on appeal; | Aamodts asserted AR FOIA rights and constitutional claim. | City: no preserved constitutional claim; district court did not discuss Constitution. | Claims not preserved; cannot raise on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031 (8th Cir. 2011) (de novo review of summary judgment standard)
- Southeast Mo. Hosp. v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 642 F.3d 608 (8th Cir. 2011) (summary judgment standard and material facts)
- City of Russellville v. Banner Real Estate, 933 S.W.2d 803 (Ark. 1996) (amendments may be by majority vote; statutory interpretation binding)
- Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) (federal law controls when state law is ambiguous in diversity)
- Taggart & Taggart Seed Co. v. City of Augusta, 647 S.W.2d 458 (Ark. 1983) (state interpretation of statutes applicable in this case)
- Osborne v. City of Camden, 784 S.W.2d 596 (Ark. 1990) (substantial compliance with filing when wiring between offices)
- Carmical v. McAfee, 7 S.W.3d 350 (Ark. App. 1999) (plain language governs statutory interpretation)
- Rolling Pines Limited P’ship v. City of Little Rock, 40 S.W.3d 828 (Ark. App. 2001) (zoning ordinances strictly construed in favor of property owners)
- City of Fordyce v. Vaughn, 781 S.W.2d 6 (Ark. 1989) (city must substantially comply with its own filing procedures)