Legal Opinion
Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City of Durham
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided April 15, 1988No. 87-1599PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge:
Naegele, a major outdoor advertising company, seeks to have a billboard ordinance adopted by the city of Durham invalidated as violative of Naegele’s first and fifth amendment rights, applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment. It also seeks damages for injuries it claims it has already suffered. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the city. We affirm the district court’s disposition of the first amendment issue, vacate the entry of summary judgment on the fifth amendment “taking” issue, and remand the case for further…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- National Advertising Company v. City of Raleigh, North Carolina, Southern Environmental Law Center, Amicus CuriaeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
- National Advertising Company v. City of OrangeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- National Advertising Company v. The City and County of DenverCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Esposito v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
- Ackerley Communications of Massachusetts, Inc. v. City of SomervilleCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.