Same as in Rockaway, but on a much smaller scale. It's about size and not about religion:

http://www.spectrum.newmilford.com/story.php?id=651841

Their petition denied, Murphys’ only appeal is to the U.S. Supreme Court


September 09, 2005
By Lynda Wellman
STAFF WRITER


A federal court has denied a petition filed on behalf of a New Milford couple seeking a rehearing in the Murphy zoning/religious freedom case.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York City has denied the petition, making a decision favorable to the town and leaving it to the Murphys to decide by Thanksgiving whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
New Milford residents Robert and Mary Murphy have been in federal court with the Zoning Commission since 2000 over prayer meetings held in their Jefferson Drive home.
A Court of Appeals three-judge panel issued a decision in favor of Zoning on March 25, but Vincent McCarthy, the attorney for the Murphys, filed a motion in May for a rehearing “en banc,” or by the full court — 13 active judges.
The New Milford Zoning Office was informed Tuesday by its attorney, Steven Byrne, that the Appeals Court denied the rehearing petition on Aug. 29.
Mr. McCarthy did not retur
n a call Wednesday, but he said in May that if the March decision stands, “We believe it would have a significant negative impact on civil rights law and RLUIPA Law,” the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
In 2000, the Murphys’ neighbors complained about the number of people attending prayer meetings, the hours of the meetings and the subsequent traffic in a residential zone.
Zoners informed the Murphys by letter that the rear parking lot and the use of the home for regular meetings of 25 to 40 people were not permitted as a matter of right or a customary use in a residential zone.
A cease and desist order was issued Dec. 19, 2000. Zoners said it was the size of the meetings, not the nature of the meetings, that was at issue.
The Murphys immediately sued New Milford, alleging various constitutional and statutory violations.
They were successful in federal district court, but the Court of Appeals vacated, or threw out, the decision of the district court, saying the Murphys commenced the suit prematurely and should have appealed the Zoning Commission decision to the local Zoning Board of Appeals before seeking judicial intervention.
“Everyone says it’s been very quiet” in the Murphys’ neighborhood, Zoning Enforcement Office Kathy Castagnetta said Wednesday.
As a result, she said, the cease and desist order has been lifted since the meetings have no longer been a problem.
Mr. Byrne said in a letter to the Zoning Commission this week that if the Murphys ask the Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decision, Zoning would be entitled to file an objection.
He said the request, called a petition for a writ of certiorari, would need to be filed by Nov. 28.