Legal Opinion
Topanga Press, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles
District Court, C.D. California
Decided August 30, 2005No. CV 88-7837 WMB, CV 89-2069-RG, CV 89-3791 RG, CV 91-0689-RG, CV 91-1035 RG, CV 91-1122 RG, CV 91-1653 RGPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO VACATE CONSENT DECREE
BYRNE, District Judge.
I. Facts
In 1989, Stuart D. Parr (Parr) and Brand X Video (Brand X) filed separate actions challenging the constitutionality of Los Angeles’s adult arcade permitting process. Parr and Brand X argued that the permit process violated the First Amendment by creating the likelihood that the government would arbitrarily deny adult arcade permits, thereby suppressing speech. The Los Angeles Municipal Code (L.A.M.C.), as it then existed, did not require the Board of Police Commissioners (the Board) to act on an adult…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Agostini v. FeltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County JailSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Thomas v. Chicago Park DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- City of Littleton v. Z. J. Gifts D-4, L. L. C.Supreme Court of the United States · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Montana Environmental Information Center v. Montana Department of Environmental QualityDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2025
- Warren v. City of ChicoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025