KELLEY

v.

JOHNSON ET UX.

Citator

Cited By

• City OF Lake Wales v. Lamar Advertising Ass'n of Lakeland, 414 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 1982)
  …striking down San Diego’s ordinance, the plurality sustained the distinction between off-site and on-site signs as set out in Suffolk Outdoor Advertising Co., Inc. v. Hulse, 43 N.Y.2d 483, 373 N.E. 2d 263, 402 N.Y.S.2d 368 (1977), appeal dismissed, 439 U.S. 808, 99 S.Ct. 66, 58 L.Ed.2d 101 (1978). In Suffolk the New York Court of Appeals upheld a town ordinance totally banning off-premises or nonaccessory billboards. Because the ordinance did not attempt to regulate the content of the signs, regulating onl…
• Metromedia, Inc. v. City OF SAN Diego, 453 U.S. 490 (U.S. 1981)
  …rst Amendment challenges to statutes or ordinances limiting the use of billboards, preferring on several occasions summarily to affirm decisions sustaining state or local legislation directed at billboards. Suffolk Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Hulse, 439 U. S. 808 (1978), involved a municipal ordinance that distinguished between offsite and onsite billboard advertising prohibiting the former and permitting the latter. We summarily dismissed as not presenting a substantial federal question an appeal from a jud…

  ← 1 / 3 →
• Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City OF Durham, 844 F.2d 172 (4th Cir. 1988)
  …Berle, 43 N.Y.2d 468, 402 N.Y.S.2d 359, 373 N.E. 2d 255 (1977), appeal dismissed, 439 U.S. 809, 99 S.Ct. 66, 58 L.Ed.2d 101 (1978); Suffolk Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Hulse, 43 N.Y.2d 483, 402 N.Y.S.2d 368, 373 N.E. 2d 263 (1977), appeal dismissed, 439 U.S. 808, 99 S.Ct. 66, 58 L.Ed.2d 101 (1978). Contrary to Naegele’s contention, the location of the billboard in commercial and industrial areas does not preclude the city from relying on aesthetics to justify its exercise of police power. The San Diego ordi…