Clever v. Cherry Hill Tp. Bd. of Education

Full title: Fred CLEVER et al., Plaintiffs, v. CHERRY HILL TOWNSHIP BD. OF EDUCATION…

Court: United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Civ. No. 93-1012(JEI).

Date published: Dec 2, 1993

Fact:

This matter comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. On November 24, 1993, this Court heard oral argument from the parties and reserved decision. For the  reasons set forth below, this Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and grant defendant’s cross-motion.

Issue:

CONCLUSION:

Because Policy JO facially, and to the extent implemented, has a genuine secular purpose,  does not impermissibly promote religion and does not unduly entangle the government in state-church relationships, there is no First Amendment violation. There being no viable federal claims, the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ state law claims. United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 86 S.Ct. 1130, 16 L.Ed.2d 218 (1966). The court will enter an order granting defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment and denying the plaintiffs’ motion.

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

2 × four =