Legal Opinion
City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided October 31, 2003No. 2 CA-CV 2002-0183PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ESPINOSA, Chief Judge.
¶ 1 The City of Tucson appeals a summary judgment in favor of Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., in the City’s action seeking to enforce its ordinances against nonconforming billboard structures. The City argues the trial court erred in retroactively applying the two-year statute of limitations in A.R.S. § 9-462.02(C) to bar the majority of its enforcement claims against Clear Channel for violating the City’s sign and zoning codes. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
¶2 On appeal, we view the facts and all reasonable inferences in the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Hayes v. Continental InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1994
- Walk v. RingArizona Supreme Court · 2002
- Ray v. Tucson Medical CenterArizona Supreme Court · 1951
- United States v. LindsaySupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Hobson v. Mid-Century InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- Corbett v. Manorcare of America, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- Estrada v. ShinnDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2020