Arnold v. Tiffany

holding West Virginia recidivist statute unconstitutional as applied to require disproportionately severe sentence | holding West Virginia recidivist statute unconstitutional as applied to require disproportionately severe sentence | class of homeowners adversely affected by zoning change held not to be a "class" within the meaning of § 1985(3) | “Plaintiffs’ counsel acknowledged, that cases have shown that §§ 1981 and 1982 are limited to instances of racial discrimination.” | class of homeowners adversely affected by zoning change held not to be a “class” within the meaning of § 1985(3) | company's action against environmentalists held a response to individual's actions, not class-based | jury may infer guilt from circumstantial evidence since defendant’s story inherently incredible | company’s action against environmentalists held a response to individual’s actions, not class-based | “A close reading of Griffin leads this Court to conclude that the words ‘class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus’ refer, at most, to that kind of irrational and odious class discrimination akin to racial bias — such as discrimination based on national origin or religion.” | same rule applicable to retained counsel | personal interview by trial judge | in forma pauperis motion denied