DANIEL GRAND, v. CITY OF UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS, OHIO; MICHAEL DYLAN BRENNAN, Mayor, in his official and individual capacity; LUKE MCCONVILLE, City Law Director, in his individual capacity; PAUL SIEMBORSKI, City Planning Commission member, in his individual capacity, - Articles

All Content

DANIEL GRAND, v. CITY OF UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS, OHIO; MICHAEL DYLAN BRENNAN, Mayor, in his official and individual capacity; LUKE MCCONVILLE, City Law Director, in his individual capacity; PAUL SIEMBORSKI, City Planning Commission member, in his individual capacity,

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Nov 13, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Eden Quainton, QUAINTON LAW, PLLC, New York, New York, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Frank H. Scialdone, MAZANEC, RASKIN, AND RYDER CO., L.P.A., Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Eden Quainton, QUAINTON LAW, PLLC, New York, New York, Jonathan Gross, LAW OFFICE OF JONATHAN GROSS, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Frank H. Scialdone, Steven K. Kelley, Zachary W. Anderson, MAZANEC, RASKIN, AND RYDER CO., L.P.A., Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Elizabeth Parr Hecker, Barbara A. Schwabauer, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae.

Judge(s): SUTTON, Chief Judge; BATCHELDER and LARSEN, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland

SUTTON, Chief Judge. Daniel Grand lives in University Heights, Ohio. In 2021, he applied for a special use permit to use his home as “a place of religious assembly” under the local zoning laws. R.81-6 at 4. Before City officials could finally resolve his petition, however, Grand withdrew the request, stating that he did not “wish to operate a house of worship as is defined under the zoning ordinance.” R.88-4 at 1. He nonetheless filed this federal lawsuit against the City and several officials, raising an assortment of statutory and constitutional claims. The district court granted summary judgment for the City and its officials on the ground that some of Grand’s challenges were unripe and the rest failed on the merits. We affirm.

Attachments: