Legal Opinion
Nakatomi Investments, Inc. v. City of Schenectady
District Court, N.D. New York
Decided January 7, 1997No. 1:96-cv-01226PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM-DECISION & ORDER
McAVOY, Chief Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
This is a case ábout non-obscene nude dancing. At issue is Plaintiffs Nakatomi Investments and AEB Enterprises’ desire to operate clubs, within the City of Schenectady, that feature nude and topless dancers.
The City of Schenectady (“City”) has two local laws that govern Plaintiffs’ business activities. The City’s Public Amusement Law regulates specific entertainment businesses and prohibits any person from exposing certain portions of the human body. See Schenectady City Code § 128-8. 1 In addition, the City Zoning Law requires that…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Elrod v. BurnsSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. O'BrienSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Heideman v. South Salt Lake CityCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Fly Fish, Inc. v. City of Cocoa BeachCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003
- Brownell v. City of RochesterDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2001
- Clarkson v. Town of FlorenceDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2002
- 801 Conklin Street Ltd. v. Town of Babylon Ex Rel. Town BoardDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1999
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.