Lorillard
Winnebago County Smoking Ordinance
Fields
- Author
- Meryimer, R.W.
- Type
- MEMO, MEMORANDUM
- OUTL, OUTLINE
- Area
- LEGAL DEPT FILE ROOM
- Alias
- 03738993/03738994
- Site
- N14
- Copied
- B, L.
- George
- Date Loaded
- 05 Jun 1998
- Document File
- 03738759/03739179/S and H Re Allergic Responses Effect of Smokers on Non-Smokers Vol 1 82-77.
- Request
- R1-004
- Litigation
- Stmn/Produced
- Characteristic
- MARG, MARGINALIA
- Master ID
- 03738724/9179
Related Documents:- 03738726
- 03738727
- 03738728
- 03738729
- 03738730
- 03738731
- 03738732
- 03738733-8742 Proposed Rule 101-20. 109-10 Regulations of Smoking
- 03738744 Rules Proposed to Curb Smoking in Federal Offices
- 03738745
- 03738746 Smoking Ban Sought
- 03738747-8758 Use of Tobacco Practices, Attitudes, Knowledge, and Beliefs United States - Fall 640000 and Spring 660000
- 03738759 S&H Re: Allergic Responses - Effect of Smokers on Non-Smokers Volume I - 770000 - 820000
- 03738760 Prior Correspondence to 770000 Has Been Destroyed, As Authorized by Mr. A.J. Stevens.
- 03738761 Effect of Smoke on Nonsmoker
- 03738764
- 03738765
- 03738766-8767 San Mateo County Firefighters Local 2400, Plaintiffs and Petitioners Vs. City of San Mateo Defendants and Respondents Order to Show Cause in the Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo Case No. 288890
- 03738768-8779 San Mateo County Fire Fighters Local 2400, Plaintiffs and Petitioners Vs. City of San Mateo, Et Al., Defendants and Respondents. Declaration of Leo C. Middendorf in the Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo Case No. 288890 Exhibit B Employment Requirements - Physical Standards, No-Smoking Clause
- 03738769-8771 Exhibit D
- 03738772-8773 Exhibit E
- 03738774 Exhibit F
- 03738775 Exhibit C
- 03738776 Exhibit B Employment Requirements - Physical Standa Rds, No-Smoking Clause
- 03738780-8786 San Mateo County Fire Fighters Local 2400, Plaintiffs and Petitioners Vs. City of San Mateo, Et Al., Defendants and Respondents. Declaration of John Mollinelli Jr. In the Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo Case No. 268890
- 03738782 Exhibit G
- 03738783 Exhibit H
- 03738784 Exhibit I Nepotism
- 03738785 Exhibit J
- 03738786 Proof of Service by Mail
- 03738787-8820 San Mateo County Fire Fighters Local 2400, Plaintiffs and Petitioners, Vs. City of San Mateo, Defendants and Respondents. Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief and for Writ of Mandate and Declaratory Relief in the Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo
- 03738821-8839 San Mateo County Fire Fighters Local 2400, Plaintiffs and Petitioners Vs. City of San Mateo, Defendants and Respondents. Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief Petition for Writ of Mandate in the Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo Case No. 268890
- 03738837 Verification
- 03738838-8839 Exhibit 'a' Employment Agreement
- 03738840-8841 Tobacco Institute Newsletter
- 03738842 Memorandum to the Committee of Counsel
- 03738843-8860 Irene C. Parodi Petitioner, US. Merit Systems Protection Board and Office of Personnel Management Respondents Opinion Appeal From the Merit Systems Protection Board Argued: 820210 Submitted 820413 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Mspb No. Sf 83i Lo9012 No. 80-7671
- 03738862
- 03738863-8864 Ashrae Seeks More Ventilation in Comm. Bldgs.
- 03738865
- 03738868-8872 Mind If I Smoke?
- 03738873-8876 The Perils of Second-Hand Smoking
- 03738883-8884
- 03738885
- 03738886-8887 He Wants Cigarette and Choice of Seat
- 03738889
- 03738890-8891
- 03738892-8893
- 03738894-8895
- 03738896
- 03738897
- 03738898
- 03738899
- 03738900
- 03738901-8902
- 03738903
- 03738904-8905 TI Newletter
- 03738906-8914 Smoking in the Workplace
- 03738915-8916
- 03738917-8920 Greater Rockford Food Service, Etc., Plaintiff, Vs Joseph Orthoefer, Etc, Et Al, Defendants. Memorandum of Decision State of Illinois in the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit County of Winnebago No.76-2447
- 03738921-8922 Greater Rockford Food Service Plaintiff, A Chapter of the Chicago and Illinois Restaurant Association, A Not-for-Profit Corporation, Plaintiff, and City of Rockford, A Municipal Corporation, Intervening Petitioner, Vs. Joseph Orthoefer, Administrator of the Winnebago County Health Department, Et Al., Defendant. Judgement Order State of Illinois in the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit County of Winnebago in Chancery No. 76-2447
- 03738923
- 03738924-8925 If You're Hooked on Gigarettes, Read on
- 03738926
- 03738927
- 03738928
- 03738929-8932 Business Smoking Survey
- 03738933
- 03738934-8935 Smoking in Public Places ... Professors Disagree
- 03738936
- 03738937
- 03738938-8939 Statement of the Pennsylvania Tavern Association with Respect to Smoking Ordinances and Laws.
- 03738940-8941 Nonsmokers Try to Clear the Air
- 03738942-8943
- 03738944
- 03738945-8947 A Smoker's Lament
- 03738948
- 03738949-8950
- 03738951
- 03738953 Matter in Dispute Between Cala Foods. Inc, and Retail Clerks Union Local 648 Involving the Discharge of Jack Hamm
- 03738954-8975 in the Matter of Arbitration Between Cala Foods, Inc. And Retail Clerks Union Local 648 Concerning the Termination of Jack W. Hamm Opinion and Award of John Phillip Linn
- 03738976
- 03738977 Experts Defend Public Smoking
- 03738978-8979 Panel Told Smoking Not Hurting Non-Smokers
- 03738980-8981 Conclusion of Mcaward Case in East Boston District Court Involving A Non-Smoking Passenger on Board American Airlines Flight, Boston Logan Airport, 780515
- 03738982-8984 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Vs. John Mcaward, East Boston District Court, East Boston, Massachusetts, 780711
- 03738985-8986
- 03738987-8988 Cigarette Smoking the Facts About Your Lungs
- 03738989-8990 Companies Put Up the 'No-Smoking Sign
- 03738991
- 03738992 Smoking Limits Aim of Director of Health Agency
- 03738995-8998 Winnebago County Smoking Ordinance
- 03738999-9001 Ordinance
- 03739003
- 03739004-9006 William T. Mccracken, Plaintiff, V. O.B. Sloan, Defendant. Complaint State of North Carolina County of Mecklenburg in the General Court of Justice Superior Court Division 75ws4270
- 03739007-9009 William T. Mccracken, Plaintiff, Vs. O.B. Sloan, Defendant. Answer State of North Carolina County of Mecklenburg in the General Court of Justice Superior Court Division 75 Cvs 4270
- 03739010-9012 William T. Mccracken, Plaintiff, Vs. O.B. Sloan, Defendant. Amended Complaint State of North Carolina County of Mecklenburg in the General Court of Justice Superior Court Division 75 Cvs 4270
- 03739013-9016 William T. Mccracken, Plaintiff, Vs. O.B. Sloan, Defendant. Answer to Amended Complaint State of North Carolina County of Mecklenburg in the General Court of Justice Superior Court Division 75 Cvs 4270
- 03739017-9019 William T. Mccracken, Plaintiff, US. O.B. Sloan, Defendant. Order State of North Carolina County of Mecklenburg in the General Court of Justice Superior Court Division 75 Cvs 4270
- 03739020-9021 Wm. T. Mccracken Vs. O.B. Sloan Plaintiff's Document List North Carolina Mecklenburg County in the General Court of Justice Superior Court Division 75 Cvs 4270
- 03739022-9023 Effect of Smoke on Non Smokers
- 03739025-9026 Arbitrator Bars General No-Smoking Rule
- 03739027-9054 in the Matter of Arbitration Between Schien Body & Equipment Co., Inc. And United Steelworkers of America, Local Union No. 8557 Fmcs No. 77k17279 No Smoking Rule Grievance No. 77-1 Decision of Arbitrator
- 03739057-9058 Alexandria Smoke Eaters Can't
- 03739059
- 03739062 Lighting A Fire Under Smokers
- 03739063 Lighting Up? Bounced Out
- 03739064
- 03739065 Virginia Town Bars Smokers As Firemen
- 03739066-9067
- 03739068-9069
- 03739071-9072
- 03739073
- 03739074
- 03739075-9076 Smoking Restrictions Are Proving Popular But Hard to Enforce
- 03739080 Federal Judge Cites the Constitution in Refusing Smoking Ban in Public Building
- 03739081 Return to Prohibition: Smokers Arrested, Fined and Jailed in Chicago
- 03739082 Today's Anti-Smoking Prohibitionists Follow Path Blazed by Carry Nation.
- 03739083 Police - Can They Enforce Smoking Prohibition Laws?
- 03739084-9085 Lawmakers Balk at Excessive Smoking Bans,
- 03739086
- 03739087-9091 Kentucky Department of Labor Occupational Health Newsletter
- 03739092-9093
- 03739094-9095
- 03739096-9098 Dining Out: Should Smokers Be Segregated?
- 03739099-9100 Second-Hand Smoke - Is It Harmful?
- 03739101
- 03739102-9103
- 03739104 Smoking Ruling Irks Gasp
- 03739105
- 03739106 A Puff for Duffy
- 03739107 Judge Nixes Nonsmokers' Court Suit
- 03739108 A Smoking Issue Ignites
- 03739109 Pipe Smoker Is Assaulted; Man, 62, Is Arrested
- 03739110 2 'no Smoking' Cases Doused
- 03739111-9112 Members of Gasp Make Citizens' Arrests of Smokers in Orange County
- 03739113-9114 Two-Year-Old Smoking Ban Works - Even If It Is Unenforceable
- 03739115 His $100 Goes Up in Smoke
- 03739116 No Smoking
- 03739117 the Smoker in Elevator Case
- 03739118 Did Smoke Get in the Eyes of Justice?
- 03739119 Chicago Court's A Drag for Subway Smokers
- 03739120 Smoking Wasn't Worth It
- 03739121-9122 Smokers Facing More Restraints, Stiffer Penalties
- 03739123 Give That Man A Big Cigar?
- 03739124 Slavney's Stogie Gets A Grievance
- 03739125 Lights Out From Court, Complicates His Problem
- 03739126 Smokers Court Gets Tough
- 03739127 No Writing on the Wall Puts Legal Smoke in Their Eyes
- 03739128 City Smoking Ordinance Ruled Valid, Trial Is Set
- 03739129 Fired Up, Newsman Smokes Out Co-Worker
- 03739130 First Person Tried Under No-Smoking Law Acquitted
- 03739131 74 Held in Violation of New Smoking Law
- 03739132 the Case Hinged on Fire
- 03739133 Smokers on Bus Are Sentenced
- 03739134 City's No-Smoking Law Gets Court Test
- 03739135 Dup of Id 03739128
- 03739136-9137 Judge Chides Nations Conscience in Beach Smoking Verdict
- 03739138-9140 All Aboard for Chicago's Costliest Puff
- 03739141 Smoker Meets His Match in Court
- 03739142 Cigaret on An Elevator Costs Him $250 Fine
- 03739143 Smoking Landmark Case
- 03739144 Lack of Respect for Laws May Be Test Case
- 03739145 Nabbing Smokers Is Easy As Netting Smoke
- 03739146-9147 Gasp Still on War Path Even After Losing Case
- 03739148
- 03739149-9150 Newsletter
- 03739151
- 03739152-9153 They Fume About Smokers
- 03739154-9155
- 03739156-9157
- 03739158
- 03739159-9160 No-Smoke Break
- 03739161
- 03739162 Is Tobacco Smoke A Aealth Hazard to Nonsmokers?
- 03739163
- 03739164-9165
- 03739166 Smoke Billows From City Ordfnance Hearing
- 03739167
- 03739168-9179 States' Statutes Regulating Smoking in Public Places
- UCSF Legacy ID
- ndy61e00
Document Images
.+
DATE: MAY 27, 1976
M E M 0
RE: WINNEBAGO COUNTY SMOKING ORDINANCE
I. DEFINITION OF "AMBIENT"
A. The word ambient is not defined in the legal di-ctionaries.
B. 'Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary contains the
following definition of the word ambient:
"Surrounding on all sides: ENCOMPASSING"
II. FIRST AMENDMENT US CONSTITUTION - RIGHT OF PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY,
FIRST AMENDMENT US CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE I, SECTION 5, ILLINOIS
CONSTITUTION
. The right to peaceably assemble is protected by the First Amend-
ment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 5 of the Illinois
Constitution.
Government may regulate in the area of freedom of assemblage only
with narrow specificity. MACP V. Button, 371 US 415, 83 S. Ct. 328. However
lawt aQd regulations involving freedom of speech and assembly should be drawn
so as to give citizens fair warning as to what is illegal, and laws and redulations.
should.not be,so broad in scope as to stifle free speech and assamb?y.
Cox V. State of Luisiana, 379 US 559, 85 S. Ct. 476.
03738993,
It is clear that local government may exercise its police power
to enhance public safety, health and morals. Legislation designed to promote
those goals may infringe upon an individual's right"to peaceful assemblage only
when the legislation is drawn with precision and only when the restriction is
reasonable.
r
Q
The Winnebago County Smoking Ordinance as I indicated in my
previous brief lacks the specificity required by the United States and
Illinois Constitution. However, I fail to see how the Ordinance
operates to infringe upon freedom of peaceful,assemblage. The Ordinance
does not prohibit the assemblage of smokers and nonsmokers, for they can
always choose to gather in properly designated smoking areas. The only
restriction is that of the activities that can take place in nonsmoking
areas.
If a Constitutional attack is to be based upon an infringement
against freedom of assemblage, the proper party Plaintiff would be a smoking
patron of one of the restaurants.
Respectfully submitted, '
i
,f
