Legal Opinion
Georgia Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City of Waynesville
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided April 11, 1990No. 89-1005PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WIDENER, Circuit Judge:
We address for the second time the constitutionality of a Waynesville, North Carolina, ordinance that could effectively prohibit all off-premise outdoor advertising signs in the city.
The district court initially granted summary judgment for Waynesville, determining that the ordinance was a proper exercise of the city’s police power that did not violate the first amendment or deny plaintiff due process of law. The district court declined, however, to address plaintiffs claim that the ordinance constituted a taking of property without just compensation in violation of the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. DeBenedictisSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Chesapeake Outdoor Enterprises, Inc. v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1991
- Outdoor Graphics, Inc. v. City Of BurlingtonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City of DurhamDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1992
- Georgia Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City Of WaynesvilleCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990
- Eller Media Co. v. Montgomery CountyCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2002