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

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…
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…
Meulemans – Spring 2022 – MJEAL

Meulemans – Spring 2022 – MJEAL

EV Tax Credits and the Shift Towards Electrification Kate MeulemansAs Americans begin to shift toward cleaner energy, the demand for electric vehicles has skyrocketed, but not without a similar spike in the political attitude surrounding electric cars. Switching from gas to electric cars is no longer just a fad among progressive elites and is in fact becoming embedded into the mainstream vernacular. But even so, buying a new car solely for fuel efficiency is not something that most people are financially stable enough to do. In this respect, it is important not only to prioritize a political push that…
Meulemans – Spring 2022 – MJEAL

Elfarissi – Spring 2022 – MJEAL

Walmart’s Liabilities Under the HWCL: A California Case Study Rita ElfarisiIn December 2021, the California Attorney General along with approximately a dozen district attorneys filed a lawsuit against Walmart.[1] The complaint alleges Walmart dumped nearly 80 tons of hazardous waste from more than 300 stores in California landfills throughout the state every year over the past five years.[2] More specifically, the complaint alleges Walmart violated several provisions of California Health and Safety Code section 25189, among other things.[3] The statute subjects individuals and entities who do not comply with the Hazardous Waste and Control Law (“HWCL”) to civil penalties.[4]…
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Dismisses First Amendment Challenges to Adult-Entertainment Ordinance

IL Appellate Court Holds City Immune From Tort Liability in Zoning Case

This post was originally published in Municipal Minute by Julie Tappendorf, Esq. of Ancel Glink and is reposted with permission In Xochi, LLC v. City of Galena, the Illinois Appellate Court found the City immune from liability under the Tort Immunity Act for claims relating to a zoning approval relating to a cannabis dispensary and upheld the dismissal of the case against the City. Xochi owned a building in the City of Galena which it agreed to lease to Veriflife, who intended to operate a cannabis dispensary. Verilife asked the City to complete a zoning form to certify that local…
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Dismisses First Amendment Challenges to Adult-Entertainment Ordinance

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

NY Appellate Court Affirms Denial of Area Variances Based on Neighborhood Character and Because the Requested Variances were Substantial

This post was authored by Amy Lavine, Esq. The petitioner had requested variances from several different zoning requirements, including the regulations for lot area, lot frontage, front yard setbacks, rear yard setbacks, and minimum and total side yard setbacks, which it needed so that it could build a single faming home. The board of zoning appeals (BZA) denied its request for area variances, however, and the Second Department confirmed the BZA’s denial on appeal. As the court explained, there was sufficient evidence to support the BZA’s determination that there would be an undesirable impact on the character of the neighborhood…