From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jaspan et al. v. Bottled Gas Corp.

U.S.
Oct 7, 1996
519 U.S. 821 (1996)

Summary

concluding that the relocation of gravesite and the subsequent use of the site for a public highway did not substantially burden religious practices or beliefs in violation of RFRA; although the parents would be "distressed and inconvenienced" by relocation of their child's gravesite, they had also engaged in religious practices at other locations and their beliefs did not render any particular site more sacred than any other or prohibit the moving of gravesites when necessary

Summary of this case from Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. West Linn

Opinion

No. 95-2020.

October 7, 1996.


ORDER

C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 80 F. 3d 38.


Summaries of

Jaspan et al. v. Bottled Gas Corp.

U.S.
Oct 7, 1996
519 U.S. 821 (1996)

concluding that the relocation of gravesite and the subsequent use of the site for a public highway did not substantially burden religious practices or beliefs in violation of RFRA; although the parents would be "distressed and inconvenienced" by relocation of their child's gravesite, they had also engaged in religious practices at other locations and their beliefs did not render any particular site more sacred than any other or prohibit the moving of gravesites when necessary

Summary of this case from Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. West Linn
Case details for

Jaspan et al. v. Bottled Gas Corp.

Case Details

Full title:JASPAN ET AL. v. GLOVER BOTTLED GAS CORP. ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Oct 7, 1996

Citations

519 U.S. 821 (1996)

Citing Cases

Wesley v. Campbell

In other words, defendants must receive actual or constructive notice of the lawsuit within the period…

Webster v. Freedom Debt Relief, LLC

Furthermore, Plaintiff is advised that bringing a complaint against John and/or Jane Doe defendants does not…