Thai Meditation Ass'n of Ala., Inc. v. City of Mobile

• Decision Date: 21 April 2022
• Docket Number: CIV. ACT. NO. 1:16-cv-395-TFM-MU
• Citation: 599 F.Supp.3d 1120
• Parties: THAI MEDITATION ASSOCIATION OF ALABAMA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF MOBILE, ALABAMA, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama

599 F.Supp.3d 1120

THAI MEDITATION ASSOCIATION OF ALABAMA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs,

v.CITY OF MOBILE, ALABAMA, Defendant.

CIV. ACT. NO. 1:16-cv-395-TFM-MU

United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division.

Signed April 21, 2022

John L. Lawler, Mobile, AL, Blair Lazarus Storzer, Pro Hac Vice, John G. Stepanovich, Roman P. Storzer, Pro Hac Vice, Storzer & Associates, P.C., Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs.

Douglas L. Anderson, Mobile, AL, Taylor Barr Johnson, Mobile, AL, Michael David Strasavich, Burr & Forman LLP, Mobile, AL, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

TERRY F. MOORER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Pending before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment and brief in support. Docs. 193, 194, both filed April 12, 2021. Defendant, The City of Mobile, motions the Court enter summary judgment in its favor as to the three (3) remaining claims in this matter that are brought pursuant to the Substantial Burden provisions of the Religious Land Use and Incarcerated Persons Act, the Free Exercise Clause of the United States Constitution, and the Alabama Religious Freedom Amendment. Doc. 193. Having considered the motion, the response, the reply, the relevant law, and the arguments that were presented at the oral argument, the motion is GRANTED .

Also pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and memorandum in support. Docs. 195, 197, both filed April 12, 2021. Plaintiffs Thai Meditation Association of Alabama, Inc., Sivaporn Nimityongskul, Varin Nimityongskul, Serena Nimityongskul, and Prasit Nimityongskul also petition the Court enter summary judgment in their favor as to the three (3) remaining claims in this matter. Doc. 195. Having considered the motion, the response, the reply, the relevant law, and the arguments that were presented at the oral argument, the motion is DENIED .

I. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, Plaintiff Thai Meditation Association of Alabama, Inc., will be referred to as "TMAA," Plaintiff Sivaporn Nimityongskul will be referred to as "Nimit," Plaintiff Varin Nimityongskul will be referred to as "V. Nimit," Plaintiff Serena Nimityongskul will be referred to as "S. Nimit," and Plaintiff Prasit Nimityongskul will be referred to as "P. Nimit." TMAA, Nimit, V. Nimit, S. Nimit, and P. Nimit will be collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs." Defendant the City of Mobile will be referred to as either "Defendant" or "the City."

No party contests jurisdiction or venue, and the Court finds adequate support for both. The district court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims in this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(3) (civil rights), and supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).

The district court has personal jurisdiction over the claims in this action because the events that gave rise to this action occurred within this district, the City is a municipal corporation that is organized and exists under the laws of Alabama, this matter involves land-use regulations that were adopted by the City, and the subject real property is located within the district. See Consol. Dev. Corp. v. Sherritt, Inc. , 216 F.3d 1286, 1291-92 (11th Cir. 2000) ("Specific jurisdiction arises out of a party's activities in the forum that are related to the cause of action alleged in the complaint.... General personal jurisdiction, on the other hand, arises from a defendant's contacts with the forum that are unrelated to the cause of action being litigated. The due process requirements for general personal jurisdiction are more stringent than for specific personal jurisdiction, and require a showing of continuous and systematic general business contacts between the defendant and the forum state.").

Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events that gave rise to Plaintiffs’ claims occurred, and a substantial part of real property that is the subject of this action is situated, in this judicial district.

II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In 2015, Plaintiffs bought property at 2354 and 2410 Eloong Drive ("the Eloong property") for the primary purpose of constructing a Buddhist meditation center on the site. Doc. 92-4; Doc. 92-29; Doc. 92-30 at 19. TMAA has a leasehold interest in the Eloong property. Doc. 92-29.

In September 2015, Nimit submitted an application to the City of Mobile Planning Commission ("the Planning Commission") for planning approval, planned unit development ("PUD"), and subdivision approval (collectively, "the Applications" or "Plaintiffs’ Applications") to permit TMAA's development on the Eloong property. Doc. 93-21. In the Applications, Plaintiffs sought construction of a 2,400-square foot meditation center building, a 2,000-square foot cottage for visiting monks, a 600-square foot restroom facility, and associated parking. Doc. 93-22. The Planning Commission ultimately denied Plaintiffs’ Applications, and the Mobile City Council ("the City Council") denied Plaintiffs’ appeal, upholding the Planning Commission's decision. Doc. 92-20 at 2.

1. The Zoning Ordinance

Chapter 64 of the Code of the City of Mobile, Alabama ("the Zoning Ordinance") divides Mobile into fifteen zoning districts, identified in Section 64-3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Doc. 92-12 at 20-53. Section 64-3 of the Zoning Ordinance sets forth the specific regulations governing the applicable districts and delineates uses permitted by right and uses requiring planning approval. Id. at 22-53, 137. If a requested use in a particular zone is not specifically listed, the City's Director of Inspection Services or his agent may determine in which district the use may be permitted by right or with planning approval. Id. at 137.

Under the Zoning Ordinance, a "church or religious facility" is permitted by right in all business districts, but it must receive planning approval to locate in any residential district. Id. at 146. Accordingly, before a church or religious facility may locate in a residential area, the Planning Commission must determine if the facility's location would be in harmony with, and appropriate for, the residential district. Id. at 137.

The Eloong Property is located in an R-1 Residential District ("R-1 District"). Doc. 93-1. R-1 Districts are composed of primarily "one-family dwellings and small open areas ... where residential development seems likely to occur." Doc. 92-12 at 22. Churches and schools are permitted with planning approval in R-1 Districts because the City wishes to encourage suitable neighborhood environments for families. Id. Because Plaintiffs sought to build a religious facility in an R-1 District, they were required to apply for planning approval.

2. Plaintiffs’ Religious Beliefs

TMAA is a Buddhist religious organization. Doc. 93-24 at 1. TMAA's purpose is "[t]eaching and research into growth and development of mind and spirit through meditation and to expand the knowledge of Buddhism." Id. TMAA is affiliated with the Dhammakaya school of Buddhism, a sect of Theravada Buddhism that is headquartered in Wat Phra Dhammakaya in Pathum Thani, Thailand. Doc. 93-75 ¶¶ 14-16. TMAA's religious exercise includes "prayer, meditation, various religious ceremonies, lectures, teaching and learning." Id. ¶ 17. While there are many different schools of Buddhism, TMAA engages in the meditation technique known as Dhammakaya meditation, which is practiced by thousands of temples in Thailand. Id. ¶¶ 13, 17. Meditation sessions at TMAA are led by either monks or lay teachers who are trained in Dhammakaya meditation. Id. at 17. Plaintiffs believe "Shakyamuni Buddha, the founder of the Buddhist religion, achieved his great spiritual insights as a result of years of meditation, and he taught that mediation is central to following his teachings." Id. ¶ 21. Every week, TMAA offers four (4) meditation classes with talks on Buddhist scriptures and morality. Id. ¶ 36.

In various public announcements, Plaintiffs explained why religion is not important for meditation. See, e.g. , Doc. 92-16. For instance, in a 2010 article that was published by AL.com, Nimit explained, "this meditation center was established in order to teach people how to find inner peace and happiness. My ultimate mission is to spread world peace through inner peace, and have people see that mediation is not to be associated with any one particular, race, culture, and religion...." Doc. 92-16 at 7. TMAA also holds itself out to be a non-profit, non-religious organization on social media and other website directories. Id. at 10, 14-15. Further, Nimit stated in her deposition:

The great thing about meditation is that philosophy/religious belief is not important. Meditation is about consciousness. The beliefs of the mind become trivial. You dive deep into the heart of the matter to gain access to your soul – your inner reality. Therefore, meditation can be practiced by people of different religions or no religion at all.

Doc. 101-2 at 6-7.

Plaintiffs assert they describe their meditation practices as "non-religious" because TMAA is open to all and "following Buddhist teachings does not require rejection of the particular theistic concepts that are central to Judeo-Christian notions of what is meant by ‘religion.’ " Doc. 94 at 5. In fact, both the Planning Commission and City Council heard testimony to this effect at the hearings in front of each body. See Doc. 92-19 at 18 ("The meditation [center] has elicited itself on Facebook and other social media as non-religious to indicate that one does not have to be Buddhist in order to come learn meditation."), Doc. 93-34 at 12 ("Buddhist liberation is essentially tied to meditation and meditation practice.").

3. Plaintiffs’ Location History

TMAA began in 2007 at a home located at 4567 Airport Boulevard, Mobile, Alabama. Doc. 93-73 ¶ 23. A Buddhist monk taught meditation classes...