Adult businesses
Cabaret Loses 1st Amendment Argument Over Use Permit
Submitted by Paul Shigley on 28 May 2009 - 11:09amA state appellate court has upheld the City of Los Angeles’s refusal to grant a conditional use permit for the sale and on-site consumption of alcohol at an adult cabaret. The court ruled that the decision to deny the permit strictly concerned alcohol and did not prohibit the expression of protected speech.
Cal Supremes Throw Out Award Of Damages To Strip Club
Submitted by Paul Shigley on 20 May 2008 - 9:09amA $1.4 million award of damages to the owners of a San Bernardino adult cabaret has been thrown out by the state Supreme Court. In a unanimous ruling, the state high court said that an appellate court had answered the wrong question when it decided the City of San Bernardino was liable for Flesh Club’s expenses and lost income during a 53-month period when the cabaret was shut down.
SD County Zoning Ordinance Survives 2 Suits Mostly Intact
Submitted by Robin Andersen on 29 November 2007 - 11:39amSan Diego County’s adult business ordinance has mostly survived two federal court challenges. In separate rulings, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ordinance’s zoning provisions pass constitutional muster.
Las Vegas Finally Wins A Round In Baby Tam Saga
Submitted by importer on 1 June 2001 - 12:00amThe latest round in the legal saga of an adult bookstore in Las Vegas has been won by the city. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the city’s regulatory system for adult businesses after the city adopted measures to ensure prompt reviews of adult business license applications by city officials and state courts.
Adult Bookstore Application Process Fails Before Ninth Circuit
Submitted by importer on 1 March 2000 - 1:00amA City of Las Vegas ordinance regarding adult bookstore permits has been declared unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The ruling in the case, known as Baby Tam II, came despite amendments to city ordinance, state law and court rules of practice that were intended to cure defects of an earlier law that the Ninth Circuit declared invalid in 1998.
