Legal Opinion

City of Tucson v. Whiteco Metrocom, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided April 14, 1999No. 2 CA-CV 98-0064PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HOWARD, Judge.

¶ 1 Appellani/cross-appellee City of Tucson challenges those portions of the trial court’s judgment determining that the City’s “vacant lot” ordinance, Tucson Code § 3-59(a)(6)(b), was unenforceable against appellee/cross-appellant Whiteco Metrocom, and that four of Whiteco’s billboards were not subject to removal. Whiteco cross-appeals the portion of the trial court’s judgment ordering it to remove eleven of its billboards. We affirm in part, and vacate and remand in part.

¶ 2 In this action for equitable relief, the City sued Whiteco, seeking the removal of several…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Atkin v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  2. People Ex Rel. Eitel v. LindheimerIllinois Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Valencia Energy Co. v. Arizona Department of RevenueArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  4. United Bank v. Mesa N. O. Nelson Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1979
  5. In Re Dos Cabezas Power DistrictCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1972

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
  2. City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
  3. FLYING DIAMOND AIRPACK, LLC v. MeienbergCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  4. City of Tempe v. Outdoor Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
  5. Loiselle v. COSAS MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLCCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API