Legal Opinion
Ebel v. City of Garden Grove
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 18, 1981No. Docket Nos. 23649, 23656PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*403Opinion
McDANIEL, J.
These two cases present the same issue, namely whether Garden Grove’s Ordinance No. 1116, which requires all businesses to obtain conditional use permits before they can legally sell or display any “adult” materials, e.g., so-called adult books, magazines and motion pictures, is vague and as such unconstitutional on its face. This requirement applies to all businesses regardless of their location within the municipality.1
Plaintiffs lease certain premises in an area zoned for commercial use in the City of Garden Grove, and they intend to operate retail stores out of these…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Smith v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Kunz v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Staub v. City of BaxleySupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- City of Santa Barbara v. AdamsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Osmond v. Ewap, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1984
- Takhar v. People ex rel. Feather River Air Quality Mgmt. Dist., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- J. L. Thomas, Inc. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Owens v. City of Signal HillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- City of Indio v. ArroyoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.