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…
This post was authored by Sebastian Perez, JD
Proposed intervenors sought to challenge AT&T’s application for a wireless facility at St. Peter’s chapel (the “Chapel”) as violative of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“TCA”). The judge had previously ordered Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s proposed settlement agreement (“Settlement Agreement”), but the Court granted the Proposed Intervenors’ motion (the “Motion”) finding all of the factors in FRCP 24(a)(2) governing intervention were met: (1) timeliness of the motion; (2) the movant’s interest related to the property or transaction that constituted the subject of the action; (3) absent intervention, the movant’s ability to protect its…
This post is authored by Andrew LW Peters originally appeared on the Rocky Mountain Sign Law Blog and is reposted with permission
The first federal circuit court opinions applying Reagan National Advertising of Austin, Inc. v. The city of Austin is flowing in, and local governments may perhaps breathe a sigh of relief: normalcy has returned. Just last week, the Seventh Circuit upheld Madison, Wisconsin’s regulations on “advertising signs,” the definition of which used the same on/off-premises distinction at issue in City of Austin.
The story there was typical of the genre. Madison has regulated billboards since at least the…
This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq.
Representatives of the City of Paris, Kentucky, applied for a zoning map amendment to rezone the 47 acres of property from a conservation district to light industrial. The Paris City Commission and its representatives entered into a non-disclosure deal with a prospective corporate purchaser to conceal its identity. A bourbon distillery was to be built on the property, but the local Planning and Zoning Commission held a hearing during which evidence was presented, and then voted six to three to deny the zone map amendment. The Planning Commission was overruled by a…
This post was authored by Julie Tappendorf and Tyler Smith of Ancel Glink and originally posted in the Municipal Minute and reposted with permission
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled against a billboard company in its First Amendment challenge to a county’s sign code. GEFT Outdoors, LLC v. Monroe County.
A billboard company sought to install a digital billboard which did not comply with the county’s sign code regulations. The company applied for a variance from the County’s Board of Zoning Appeals (BZOA). After the BZOA denied the variance request, the billboard company sued the county under a…
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…
This post was originally published on the RLUIPA Defense blog by Evan Seeman, Esq. of Robinson & Cole, and is reposted with permission.
A district court has ruled that the City of Meriden, Connecticut (the City) discriminated against Omar Islamic Center Inc. following the City’s denial of the Islamic Center’s application to move its mosque to another location. The Islamic Center (the Center) outgrew its prior location – a 1,200 square foot space above a pizza restaurant in a neighboring city – and was unable to accommodate the members of the assembly, the number of students interested in its Quran…
This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq.
Property owner Powlette filed a malicious prosecution suit against the township’s zoning code enforcement officer, Carlson, alleging that the officer engaged in intentional and malicious conduct by swearing to a second criminal complaint against the owner for operating a bed and breakfast without a conditional-use certificate after the original complaint against the owner was conditionally dismissed. The Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, granted the officer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and Powlette appealed.
After reviewing the pleadings, and construing all material accusations and all reasonable inferences therefrom in favor of…
