United States v. City of Parma, PH. E. 0. H. Rpt. 19 United States v. National Society of Professional U.S. April 25, 1978) Village of Bellwood v. Gladstone Realtors, 569 F.2d 31 1333 18 Cases Continued Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia U.S. Warner-Lambert Company v. F. T. C., 562 F.2d 749 No. 77-855) Page 26 26 32 18, 24, 26 18 Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. $1982 . . 18 On Appeal from the United States District Court for the BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES INTRODUCTION This is an appeal in a fair housing suit brought by the United States against four trade associations under 42 U.S.c. §3613. The Appellant is not one of the original defendant associations but rather a member of one of the associations which 1/ entered into a settlement agreement with the government 1/ The association entering the settlement is the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (hereinafter AIREA). concluding the suit as to it. The Appellant, along with others similarly situated, was allowed limited permissive intervention ". . . solely for the purpose of contesting the legality of the settlement agreement insofar as it may infringe his constitutional right to freedom of speech." 442 F. Supp. at 2/ 1076. He sought an injunction prohibiting execution of the settlement agreement. The court below denied the injunction and approved the settlement agreement. Appellant claims that the court below erred (1) in finding no state action involved in the settlement agreement, (2) in concluding that his first amendment rights were not violated by the terms of the agreement, and (3) in concluding that the First Amendment issues which he wished to raise were not ripe for decision. It is clear from the face of the settlement agreement (A. 37-107) that some of its terms would affect Milloway's conduct as an appraiser so long as he remained a member of AIREA. It is equally clear that other provisions of the settlement agreement affect only AIREA and would not, standing alone, affect him in any way. In his brief, however, the appellant has failed to specify which terms, if any, of the settlement agreement violate his First Amendment rights. Instead, in making an undifferentiated attack on the entire agreement, the 2/ The decision of the court below has been reported as United States v. American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 442 F. Supp. 1072 (N.D. 111., 1977), and all references to the decision in this brief will be cited to the appropriate page of the reported case. |