WA Court of Appeals Finds Policy in City’s Comprehensive Plan Regarding Commercial Uses in Industrial Areas Did Not Apply to Centers and Shelters

WA Court of Appeals Finds Policy in City’s Comprehensive Plan Regarding Commercial Uses in Industrial Areas Did Not Apply to Centers and Shelters

This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq. In 2018, the City of Puyallup adopted the Puyallup Municipal Ordinance (PMO) 3179, which established a new chapter of the Puyallup Municipal Code—chapter 20.72 (PMC 20.72). This new code chapter restricted the sites of day use centers and overnight shelters serving people experiencing homelessness within the City. The ordinance permitted such centers and shelters only in industrial zones in a small corner of the City that was distant from any services and had almost no access to transit. Siting anywhere else in the City required approval from a majority of Puyallup’s city…
WA Court of Appeals Finds Policy in City’s Comprehensive Plan Regarding Commercial Uses in Industrial Areas Did Not Apply to Centers and Shelters

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Dismisses First Amendment Challenges to Adult-Entertainment Ordinance

This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq. In 2003, the City of Augusta, Georgia enacted an adult-entertainment ordinance with the stated purpose of combating negative secondary effects associated with adult-oriented businesses. The owners and operators of two longstanding nude-dancing clubs in downtown Augusta, the Discotheque Lounge and Joker’s Lounge, sued the City and others claiming that the ordinance and related regulations violated the First Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to the City on some claims and held that the plaintiffs lacked standing on other claims, and this appeal followed. On appeal, Plaintiffs first argued that the 2003…
Injury Lawyers Toronto |  Sokoloff Lawyers

Injury Lawyers Toronto | Sokoloff Lawyers

Sokoloff Lawyers are committed to protecting your privacy. This Privacy Policy outlines how we handle your personal information to protect your privacy. Privacy Legislation:Since January 1, 2004, all Canadian organizations engaged in commercial activities have been required to comply with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA”) and the Canadian Standards Association Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information incorporated by reference into PIPEDA . These obligations extend to lawyers and law firms, including Sokoloff Lawyers. As a services firm, we have professional and ethical obligations to keep confidential the information we receive in the context of…
Noem taps impeachment prosecutor to replace attorney general

Noem taps impeachment prosecutor to replace attorney general

PIERRE, SD (AP) — South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem has appointed the lead prosecutor in the Senate impeachment trial of former Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg to fill the remainder of Ravnsborg’s term. Noem’s interim appointment of Pennington County State’s Attorney Mark Vargo was effective Tuesday. She pushed for Ravnsborg, a first-term fellow Republican, to step down days after he was struck and killed a pedestrian with his car in 2020, and later pushed for his impeachment. Ravnsborg was ultimately successful last week of two impeachment counts and was removed from the office. “Mark Vargo returns integrity, experience and stability to…
WA Court of Appeals Finds Policy in City’s Comprehensive Plan Regarding Commercial Uses in Industrial Areas Did Not Apply to Centers and Shelters

Seventh Circuit Upholds Digital Sign Ban Citing Recent Supreme Court Case

This post originally appeared in Municipal Minute by Julie Tappendorf, Esq. of Ancel Glink and is reposted with permission. We have written a number of posts on Municipal Minute discussing the US Supreme Court’s rulings in cases challenging municipal sign codes under the First Amendment. In 2015, we reported on the Court’s decision in Reed v. Gilbert that struck down the Town of Gilbert, Arizona’s temporary sign regulations. The Reed case had afterward been applied by a number of courts across the country in challenges to municipal sign regulations where sign companies and others made an argument that the challenged…
Lehman – Spring 2022 – MJEAL

Lehman – Spring 2022 – MJEAL

Agency Delegation to External Parties: An Unexplored Challenge Benjamin LehmanThe Supreme Court recently declined to grant cert in Texas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, a case from the 5thth Circuit. However, the three justices said the decision was driven by threshold issues of mootness and statute of limitations, but they would grant a review on the delegation issues in a future case.[1] The case revived two major questions about the constitutional limits on delegation and presented a third issue for the first time. First, the petition challenged the extent to which legislative power can be constitutionally delegated away from…
WA Court of Appeals Finds Policy in City’s Comprehensive Plan Regarding Commercial Uses in Industrial Areas Did Not Apply to Centers and Shelters

NY Appellate Court Upholds Damages for Partial Takings

This post was authored by Ashlee Vega- Slattery, Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center The question in 20 Rewe Street, LTD v State of New York is whether a landowner was adequately compensated by the State for the partial taking of their Brooklyn property. The property, located in a manufacturing/industrial zone and totaling 39,900 square feet, was primarily unimproved; it consists only of a concrete wall and chain-link fence, and was used for storage and parking. In January of 2012, the New York State Department of Transportation seized 27,041 square feet from the northern side of the property, leaving…
Fed.  Dist.  Court of Michigan Finds Plaintiffs Did Not Obtain a Vested Property Interest Because Their Nonconforming Use Did Not Comply with Prior Zoning

Fed. Dist. Court of Michigan Finds Plaintiffs Did Not Obtain a Vested Property Interest Because Their Nonconforming Use Did Not Comply with Prior Zoning

This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq. Plaintiffs owned homes in the City of New Buffalo, Michigan, that they used, or intended to use, as short-term rental properties. In 2019, the City passed an ordinance requiring homeowners in the City to obtain a permit before using their homes as short-term rentals. In 2020, the City adopted a resolution that suspended the issuance of such permits. Plaintiffs brought this action against the City to challenge the validity of that resolution under state and federal law. At the outset, the court noted that Plaintiffs’ failure or inability to obtain a short-term…