Legal Opinion
Dream Palace v. County of Maricopa
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 27, 2004No. 00-16531PublishedCited by 67 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge O’SCANNLAIN; Concurrence by Judge CANBY.
O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge.
We must decide whether a local ordinance imposing certain licensing requirements and operating restrictions on adult entertainment establishments violates the First Amendment.
I
A
In 1996, the Arizona legislature amended § 11-821 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, to authorize counties to enact zoning ordinances with respect to adult entertainment establishments. See Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 11-821. Acting on its new authority, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors asked its Planning and Development Department to…
2Cases cited70 opinions
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- City of Los Angeles v. LyonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Ward v. Rock Against RacismSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- Carrico v. City and County of San FranciscoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Flint v. DennisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Raich v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- David Harrison v. Scott KernanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Crown Point Development, Inc. v. City of Sun ValleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.