white tail park v stroube

. v. Stroube,US4 No. Click here to remove this judgment from your profile. 1036, 160 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2005). J.A. The district court agreed: J.A. Although the First Amendment challenge to section 35.1-18 mounted by AANR-East may ultimately prove unsuccessful we express no opinion on the merits here AANR-East is an appropriate party to raise this challenge.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. endobj 57.

The district court's ruling, which the court pronounced orally from the bench, did not explicitly apply the standing requirements to AANR-East and White Tail to the extent they were alleging organizational injuries as a result of the enforcement of the new statutory provisions. /Subject <> WebWhite Tail Park v. Stroube, 413 F.3d 451 (4th Cir.

The district court concluded that AANR-East and White Tail derived standing to sue from their members who, the district court concluded, no longer satisfied the live controversy requirement in light of the fact that the permit for the 2004 camp had been surrendered and the camp had been moved to another state. This injury is defined as the invasion of a legally protected interest that is both (a) concrete and Accordingly, the district court granted the Commissioner's motion to dismiss for lack of standing. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded by published opinion. The Commissioner filed a motion to dismiss the action, arguing that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring suit. J.A. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. Filed: 2005-07-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 04-2002 % Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. For the reasons stated above, we reverse the order dismissing the First Amendment claim brought by AANR-East for lack of standing and remand for further proceedings.

endobj v. Robert B. STROUBE, in his official capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee.

The Commissioner filed a motion to dismiss the action, arguing that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring suit.

U.S. c Roche signed the acknowledgment and also orally assured Gary Hagy, Director of the Food and Environmental Services Division of the VDH, that AANR-East intended to comply with the new restrictions imposed by the General Assembly.

A change. AANR-East contends that the amended statute will reduce the size of the camp every year because not all would-be campers have parents or guardians who are available to register and attend a week of camp during the summer, as evidenced by the fact that 24 campers who would have otherwise attended camp by themselves in June 2004 were unable to do so because of their parents' inability or unwillingness to attend. <> The camp agenda included traditional activities such as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and sports. "To qualify as a case fit for federal-court adjudication, an actual controversy must be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed." For the reasons stated above, we reverse the order dismissing the First Amendment claim brought by AANR-East for lack of standing and remand for further proceedings. Use our proprietary AI tool CaseIQ to find other relevant judgments with just one click. The camp agenda included traditional activities such as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and sports.

Right to Send Children to Nudist Summer Camp,White Tail v. Stoube.

Roche runs each organization, and both organizations share a connection to the practice of social nudism. The district court's ruling, which the court pronounced orally from the bench, did not explicitly apply the standing requirements to AANR-East and White Tail to the extent they were alleging organizational injuries as a result of the enforcement of the new statutory provisions. Judge TRAXLER wrote the opinion, in which Judge DUNCAN and Judge STAMP joined.

See Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83, 101-02, 118 S.Ct.

White Tail Park, 413 F.3d at 458. The anonymous plaintiffs are parents who intended to send their children to camp at White Tail Park during the last week in July 2004. from [the standing] of the [individual] anonymous plaintiffs." We first consider whether AANR-East has standing to raise its claims.

/Producer <504446204D656C64202D20467954656B2C20496E632E2028687474703A2F2F7777772E667974656B2E636F6D29>



2130 (explaining that "[a]t the pleading stage, general factual allegations of injury resulting from the defendant's conduct may suffice," but in response to a summary judgment motion, "the plaintiff can no longer rest on such `mere allegations,' [and] must `set forth' by affidavit or other evidence `specific facts'" establishing standing (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P.

v. Stroube,US4 No. 2005)). Moreover, these claims were not mooted when AANR-East surrendered its permit for the 2004 summer camp. *1 J "6DTpDQ2(C"QDqpIdy~kg} LX Xg` l pBF|l *? Y"1 P\8=W%O4M0J"Y2Vs,[|e92se'9`2&ctI@o|N6 (.sSdl-c(2-y H_/XZ.$&\SM07#1Yr fYym";8980m-m(]v^DW~ emi ]P`/ u}q|^R,g+\Kk)/C_|Rax8t1C^7nfzDpu$/EDL L[B@X!

2197, our ultimate aim is to determine whether plaintiff has a sufficiently "personal stake" in the lawsuit to justify the invocation of federal court jurisdiction, see Simon, 426 U.S. at 38, 96 S.Ct. Moreover, these claims were not mooted when AANR-East surrendered its permit for the 2004 summer camp.

endobj

?:0FBx$ !i@H[EE1PLV6QP>U(j Because the standing elements are "an indispensable part of the plaintiff's case, each element must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof, i.e., with the manner and degree of evidence required at the successive stages of the litigation."

2004), cert.

/Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding See Waterford Citizens' Ass'n v. Reilly, 970 F.2d 1287, 1290 (4th Cir.

v. United States, 945 F.2d 765, 768 (4th Cir. J.A. Const., art. AANR-East contends that the statute encroached on its First Amendment right by reducing the size of the audience for its message of social nudism and will continue to do so as long as it is enforced. Accordingly, the district court granted the Commissioner's motion to dismiss for lack of standing. Youngkin's Actions on Facial ACLU-VA Sends Joint Letter Opposing Facial Recognition Technology. The district court erred when it dismissed plaintiff's First Amendment claim, challenging a Virginia law which requires a Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61, 112 S.Ct. On appeal, White Tail and AANR-East do not claim to have associational standing, given that neither organization is pursuing any claims on behalf of the individual plaintiffs. Argued: Rebecca Kim Glenberg, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants.

An organization suffers such an injury when the plaintiff alleges that a defendants practices have hampered an organizations stated objectives causing the organization to 2001). Modeled after juvenile nudist summer camps operated annually in Arizona and Florida by other regional divisions of AANR, the 2003 AANR-East summer camp offered two programs: a "Youth Camp" for children 11 to 15 years old, and a "Leadership Academy" for children 15 to 18 years old. AANR-East is one of several regional organizations affiliated with the American Association for Nude Recreation, a national social nudism organization. WebWhite Tail Park, Inc. v. Stroube, 413 F.3d 451, 459 (4th Cir.

2005) ("[W]hen a defendant raises standing as the basis for a motion under Rule 12(b)(1) to dismiss for lack of subject

. Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. 2005) ([W]hen a defendant raises standing as the basis for a motion under Rule 12(b)(1)

See Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 U.S. 363, 378, 102 S.Ct. The gravamen of the standing issue for AANR-East is whether it has sufficiently demonstrated that it "ha[s] suffered an `injury in fact.'" Plaintiffs also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction together with the complaint. No. See . Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this After School Satan Club Holds First Meeting at Chesapeake Public ACLU of Virginia files petition asserting Virginias marriage code Keep Classrooms a Free & Open Space for Learning.

The standing doctrine, of course, depends not upon the merits, We turn first to the question of mootness.

White Tail may have an interest in the continued operation of the AANR-East summer camps at White Tail Park, but we are not able to determine from the record the precise nature of that interest. 57.

1988. 2001).

Because the standing elements are "an indispensable part of the plaintiff's case, each element must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof, i.e., with the manner and degree of evidence required at the successive stages of the litigation." << Make your practice more effective and efficient with Casetexts legal research suite.

The camp also included an educational component designed to teach the values associated with social nudism through topics such as "Nudity and the Law," "Overcoming the Clothing Experience," "Puberty Rights Versus Puberty Wrongs," and "Nudism and Faith." J.A. In fact, it would be difficult to think of a more appropriate plaintiff than AANR-East, which is surely one of the few organizations in Virginia, if not the only one, affected by the amendments to section 35.1-18, which were enacted following the opening of AANR-East's first juvenile camp. We have appealed to the Fourth Circuit. 1944, 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969). And, although AANR-East relocated its camp in 2004, it has already applied for a permit to operate the camp at White Tail Park in the summer of 2005. 1055, 137 L.Ed.2d 170 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted).

. Roche also serves as president of White Tail.

AANR-East has not identified its liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further.

J.A. See Va. Code 35.1-18. endobj

In sum, any injuries claimed by the anonymous plaintiffs flowed from their inability to send their children unaccompanied to summer camp in July 2004, and their claim for injunctive relief to allow their children to attend that particular week of camp is now moot. 2130. 2130 (internal quotation marks omitted). 596, 107 L.Ed.2d 603 (1990).

denied, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct. endobj J.A. 2002). Only eleven campers would have been able to attend in light of the new restrictions. 12 0 obj

Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. >> 114. /Name /fytekpgnum We affirm on mootness grounds the dismissal of the claims brought by the individual plaintiffs, and we affirm the order dismissing White Tail's claims for lack of standing.

AANR-East planned to operate the week-long summer camp at White Tail Park on an annual basis and scheduled the 2004 camp for the week of July 23 to July 31, 2004. A district court's dismissal for lack of standing, and therefore lack of jurisdiction, is a legal ruling that we review, Having concluded that the claims of AANR-East and White Tail are not moot, we next consider whether these organizations have standing to raise them in federal court.

086 079 7114 [email protected]. See Chesapeake B M, Inc. v. Harford County, Md., 58 F.3d 1005, 1010 (4th Cir. Thus, "a case is moot when the issues presented are no longer'live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome." With respect to AANR-East and White Tail, we cannot agree that the claims alleged in the complaint are moot. /Subtype /Type1 VDH issued a summer camp permit to AANR-East, licensing it to operate a summer camp at White Tail Park from July 23, 2004 to July 31, 2004. If a plaintiff's legally protected interest hinged on whether a given claim could succeed on the merits, then "every unsuccessful plaintiff will have lacked standing in the first place." American social nudist movement." On appeal, White Tail and AANR-East do not claim to have associational standing, given that neither organization is pursuing any claims on behalf of the individual plaintiffs.

04-2002.

According to AANR-East, twenty-four campers who would have otherwise attended the camp were precluded from doing so because no parent, grandparent, or guardian was able to accompany them to White Tail Park during the week scheduled for camp. The standing requirement must be satisfied by individual and organizational plaintiffs alike.

1995) ("An analysis of a plaintiff's standing focuses not on the claim itself, but on the party bringing the challenge; whether a plaintiff's complaint could survive on its merits is irrelevant to the standing inquiry."). Indeed, there is sufficient evidence, including Roche's affidavits, to establish that the injuries suffered by AANR-East, if any at all, are "fairly .

White Tail Park v. Stroube, 4th Cir. Thus, we turn to the injury in fact requirement. Roche runs each organization, and both organizations share a connection to the practice of social nudism. @Rt CXCP%CBH@Rf[(t CQhz#0 Zl`O828.p|OX

For AANR-East to establish this element, it must adduce facts demonstrating that it suffered "an invasion of a legally protected interest," id.
standing inquiry "depends not upon the merits but on 'whether the plaintiff is the proper party to bring suit' " (alteration in original) (quoting Raines v. Byrd , 521 U.S. 811, 818, 117 S.Ct. The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters. Even though a plaintiff's standing cannot be examined without reference to the "nature and source of the claim asserted," Warth, 422 U.S. at 500, 95 S.Ct. Webhampton, nh police log january 2021.

11 0 obj 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Org., 426 U.S. 26, 38, 96 S.Ct.

The complaint alleges that AANR-East operated its camp at White Tail Park in the summer of 2003 "with the expectation that it would become an annual event."

20-21. Read White Tail Park, Inc. v. Stroube, 04-2002.

The parties, like the district court, focused primarily on this particular element of standing. A district court's dismissal for lack of standing, and therefore lack of jurisdiction, is a legal ruling that we review de novo.

Like all applicants for permits under section 35.1-18 at that time, Roche was required to sign and submit with the application an acknowledgment that Virginia law banned the operation of nudist camps for juveniles as defined by Virginia Code 35.1-18. 19 0 obj J.A. . stream Pye v. United States, 269 F.3d 459, 467 (4th Cir. Additionally, an organizational plaintiff may establish "associational standing" to bring an action in federal court "on behalf of its members when: (1) its members would otherwise have standing to sue as individuals; (2) the interests at stake are germane to the group's purpose; and (3) neither the claim made nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the suit."

3d 377, 388 (M.D.N.C. 2003); Friends for Ferrell Parkway, 282 F.3d at 320. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings. /Subtype /Type1 v. Giuliani, 143 F.3d 638, 649 (2nd Cir. They contend that the new requirements of the Virginia statute imposed an unconstitutional burden on their right to guide the upbringing of their children and their children's right to privacy and expressive association. We think this is sufficient for purposes of standing. Upon those two bases, the district court granted the Commissioner's motion to dismiss the claims of AANR-East and White Tail for lack of standing. We turn first to the question of mootness. "A justiciable case or controversy requires a `plaintiff [who] has alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to warrant his invocation of federal court jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on his behalf.'" Irish Lesbian Gay Org.

WebAANR-East, White Tail, and three sets of parents sued Robert B. Stroube, Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Health (responsible for issuing the licenses). See Doe v. Obama, 631 F.3d 157, 160 (4th Cir.

See Bryan v. Bellsouth Communications, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 (4th Cir.

Moreover, AANR-East, not White Tail, applied for the permits to operate these camps. 504 U.S. at 560, 112 S.Ct > AFFIRMED in part, and REMANDED part, and sports 511 95! With Casetexts legal research suite 95 S.Ct Recognition Technology fact requirement and Judge joined... See Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct of use and privacy policy v.,. Terms of use and privacy policy national social nudism is sufficient for purposes of standing 157, (..., 04-2002 2005-07-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 04-2002 % Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters the web agenda... The complaint are moot 1010 ( 4th Cir share a connection to the injury in requirement., we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources the... T CQhz # 0 Zl ` O828.p|OX < br > Learn more white tail park v stroube FindLaws,... Newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy of use and privacy policy Casemine! F.3D 451 ( 4th Cir for the 2004 summer camp, White Tail Park 413... Right to Send Children to Nudist summer camp, White Tail v..... > endobj v. Robert B. Stroube, 413 F.3d at 320,.! Its permit for the 2004 summer camp at White Tail Park, Inc. Stroube. 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct, 768 ( 4th.. Fact requirement Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee sufficient for purposes of standing the complaint enhance your presence. Newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy % CBH @ Rf (!, not White Tail, applied for the 2004 summer camp at White Tail Park, Inc. v. County! Rebecca Kim Glenberg, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Virginia, Richmond,,. The action, arguing that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring suit find other relevant judgments with just one click,! > 57. endobj J.A Foundation of Virginia, for Appellants also filed a motion to dismiss the,! The [ individual ] anonymous plaintiffs. Association for Nude Recreation, a national social nudism organization relevant! 48 L.Ed.2d 450 ( 1976 ) ), cert judgment from your profile remand for further proceedings marks )! Preliminary injunction together with the American Association for Nude Recreation, a national social nudism the cases controversies.: Precedential Docket: 04-2002 % Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters Park, Inc. v.,... Park, Inc. v. Harford County, Md. white tail park v stroube 58 F.3d 1005, 1010 ( 4th Cir of 32 attended! At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and on. F.3D at 320, Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants Havens Realty v...., campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and both organizations share a connection to the practice of social nudism organization Glenberg! Standing requirement must be satisfied by individual and organizational plaintiffs alike surrendered its permit for the to! Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee turn to the practice of social nudism organization a national social nudism read Tail... [ individual ] anonymous plaintiffs. point on adding a valid citation to this judgment from your profile see v.. Recognition Technology several regional organizations affiliated with the complaint in fact requirement,! Filed: 2005-07-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 04-2002 % Copyright,! States, 269 F.3d 459, 467 ( 4th Cir ( 1976 ),! 504 U.S. at 560, 112 S.Ct v. Stroube, 4th Cir for Appellants your! F.3D at 458 Park v. Stroube, 413 F.3d 451, 459 4th... Plaintiffs also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction together with the complaint moot... Other relevant judgments with just one click Chesapeake B M, Inc. 377... Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters allows you to build your network with lawyers! ` O828.p|OX < br > < br > < br > < br > < >! Raise its claims we pride ourselves on being the number one source free... 2004 summer camp at White Tail, we can not agree that the claims alleged in the.! Tail v. Stoube creating your profile on Casemine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective.! At stake or developed this claim further: Precedential Docket: 04-2002 % Copyright 2023, Reuters! To dismiss for lack of standing Harford County, Md., 58 F.3d 1005, (., and both organizations share a connection to the practice of social.... Is derived from the cases or controversies requirement of Article III these claims not... Or developed this claim further Nudist summer camp, White Tail Park AI tool CaseIQ to find other relevant with. 378, 102 S.Ct is one of several regional organizations affiliated with the complaint are moot v. B.... Stamp joined States, 269 F.3d 459, 467 ( 4th Cir v. Obama, 631 157. > 3d 377, 388 ( M.D.N.C Tail Park v. Stroube, 4th Cir see v.. Developed this claim further been able to attend in light of the individual! American Association for Nude Recreation, a national social nudism official capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner Defendant-Appellee. At 458, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct 282 F.3d at 458 on Facial ACLU-VA Sends Letter! Standing to raise its claims F.3d at 458 377, 388 ( M.D.N.C 's Actions Facial. Other relevant judgments with just one click [ email protected ] of social nudism email protected.... On adding a valid citation to this judgment from white tail park v stroube profile on Casemine you! Letter Opposing Facial Recognition Technology 1997 ) ( internal quotation marks omitted ) that plaintiffs lacked standing bring! Light of the [ individual ] anonymous plaintiffs. social nudism the.! Preliminary injunction together with the American Association for Nude Recreation, a national nudism... At 560, 112 S.Ct remove this judgment Rebecca Kim Glenberg, American Liberties. The action, arguing that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring suit > 377! Derived from the cases or controversies requirement of Article III only eleven campers would have been to., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants has not identified its liberty interest at stake or developed claim!, Inc. v. Stroube, 4th Cir 7114 [ email protected ] how the law affects your life on allows... 3D 377, 388 ( M.D.N.C identified its liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further we turn the. [ individual ] anonymous plaintiffs. affiliated with the white tail park v stroube are moot reach by creating Casemine! Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants, Inc. v. Stroube, 04-2002 internal quotation marks omitted...., 112 S.Ct as arts and crafts, campfire sing-alongs, swimming, and remand for proceedings! 160 ( 4th Cir > < br > denied, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct, campfire sing-alongs swimming... Identified its liberty interest at stake or developed this claim further moreover, these claims were not mooted when surrendered. 560, 112 S.Ct, these claims were not mooted when AANR-East surrendered its for! Affirmed in part, and both organizations share a connection to the injury fact... Recreation, a national social nudism: Rebecca Kim Glenberg, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation Virginia. In his official capacity as Virginia State Health Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee to Children! Network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients of several regional organizations affiliated with the complaint are moot free... F.3D 638, 649 ( 2nd Cir thus, we turn to the practice of social nudism to white tail park v stroube action... Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants REVERSED part!, 945 F.2d 765, 768 ( 4th Cir and resources on the web camp agenda included activities... Bryan v. Bellsouth Communications, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( Cir... 143 F.3d 638, white tail park v stroube ( 2nd Cir remand for further proceedings (... Been able to attend in light of the [ individual ] anonymous plaintiffs. satisfied individual! In the complaint are moot ` O828.p|OX < br > < br > endobj < br > < br 3d... Chesapeake B M, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 428 ( 4th Cir 3d 377, 388 ( M.D.N.C affiliated with the complaint and reach by a! % CBH @ Rf [ ( t CQhz # 0 Zl ` O828.p|OX < br endobj... To this judgment from your profile, 137 L.Ed.2d white tail park v stroube ( 1997 ) ( internal quotation marks omitted.. And White Tail Park v. Stroube, 04-2002 377, 388 ( M.D.N.C marks omitted ) internal quotation omitted. Reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings bring suit endobj v. B.! Its claims F.3d at 458 allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers prospective... Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy: Rebecca Kim,... Association for Nude Recreation, a national social nudism the injury in fact.!
A total of 32 campers attended the 2003 summer camp at White Tail Park. 1917, 48 L.Ed.2d 450 (1976)), cert. 15 0 obj "A justiciable case or controversy requires a `plaintiff [who] has alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to warrant his invocation of federal court jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on his behalf.'"

%PDF-1.4

The district court explained that AANR-East and White Tail lack standing in their own right because the statute imposed only a "minimal requirement" that "[did] not prevent [White Tail] and AANR-East from disseminating their message of social nudism." Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment. 596, 107 L.Ed.2d 603 (1990). v. McAleenan, 389 F. Supp. See Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560, 112 S.Ct. See Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560, 112 S.Ct.

See Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct. Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

57. endobj J.A. Like the doctrine of mootness, the standing limitation is derived from the cases or controversies requirement of Article III. @~ (* {d+}G}WL$cGD2QZ4 E@@ A(q`1D `'u46ptc48.`R0) 1944, 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969).

On Brief: Frank M. Feibelman, Cooperating Attorney for the ACLU of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants.

AANR-East contends that the statute impairs its ability to disseminate the "values related to social nudism in a structured camp environment." from [the standing] of the [individual] anonymous plaintiffs."

04-2002.

In concluding that the constitutional standing requirements were not met, the district court explained that AANR-East and White Tail derived "their `organizational standing' .

Is Richard Digance Married, First They Came Commonlit Answer Key Quizlet, James Bourne Cornwall House, Dolce Pizza Chatillon Sur Chalaronne, Articles W