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 LinnOpinion
No. 95-2020.
October 7, 1996.
ORDER
C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 80 F. 3d 38.