County Board of Arlington County v. Richards
434 U.S. 5 · Decided October 11, 1977 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
County Board of Arlington County v. Richards was decided on October 11, 1977 by a vote of 8–1. The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. The decision was issued per curiam (an unsigned opinion of the Court). SCDB classifies its main issue as “Zoning and land use restrictions” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 434 U.S. 5 · 98 S. Ct. 24 · 54 L. Ed. 2d 4 · 1977 U.S. LEXIS 26
- Docket number
- 76-1418
- Decided
- October 11, 1977
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Per curiam (no oral argument)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 8–1
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Zoning and land use restrictions
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Jurisdictional dissent | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Full case caption
County Board of Arlington County, Virginia, et al. v. Richards et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1977-002, docket 1977-002-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Zoning and land use restrictions”
- Moore v. City of East ClevelandLaw held unconstitutional
- City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc.
- Agins et Ux. v. City of Tiburon
- Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Wilkins v. United States
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Idaho Department of Employment v. Smith
- Zablocki v. RedhailLaw held unconstitutional
- School District of Omaha v. United States
- Brennan v. Armstrong
- Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman
- Maher v. Roe
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Southern Overlying Carrier Chapter of the California Dump Truck Owners Association v. Public Utilities Commission of California
- Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United States
- Pfizer Inc. v. Government of India
- Carter v. MillerLaw held unconstitutional
- Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceLaw held unconstitutional
- J. W. Bateson Co., Inc. v. United States ex Rel. Board of Trustees of the National Automatic Sprinkler Industry Pension Fund
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error