Young v. Ricketts

Plaintiff, a licensed California real estate broker, filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against Nebraska officials in their official capacities, seeking, among other things, prospective relief declaring that provisions of the Nebraska Real Estate License Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. 81-885.01 to 81-885.55, violated her constitutional rights. The district court subsequently granted defendants' motion for summary judgment. The court concluded that plaintiff failed to prove that the Nebraska License Act, on its face, was regulation of speaking or publishing as such,” rather than legitimate regulation of the real estate broker profession; at a minimum, plaintiff was a "broker" because she held herself out as one who was "listing" property for compensation; and plaintiff's contention that the License Act violates the First Amendment because it is vague and overbroad is without merit. The court further concluded that its conclusion that the License Act does not restrict speech contrary to the First Amendment forecloses her other facial attacks on the statute. In this case, the License Act is rationally related to the legitimate State interest in ensuring the competency and honesty of those who hold themselves out as providing professional brokerage services to the sellers and buyers of Nebraska real estate. Finally, plaintiff's claim under the privileges or immunities clause is foreclosed by the Slaughter-House Cases. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment. View "Young v. Ricketts" on Justia Law