Legal Opinion
Di Ma Corp. v. City of St. Cloud
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 5, 1997No. C2-96-1584PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DANIEL F. FOLEY, Judge *
DI MA Corporation, Malcolm, Inc., and Compel Corporation brought this action challenging the constitutionality of the City of St. Cloud’s ordinances regulating adult use establishments. In addition, in relevant part, DI MA and Malcolm sought injunctive relief against the city to prevent enforcement of the amortization ordinance, and Compel sought damages against the city because its club was temporarily closed under the ordinance and ultimately went out of business.
A trial was held before a jury, which returned a special verdict in favor of the city. The trial…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Bantam Books, Inc. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. Carolene Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kismet Investors, Inc. v. County of BentonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
- Northshor Experience, Inc. v. City of Duluth, MNDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2006
- Truckor v. Erie TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2009
- AVR, INC. v. City of St. Louis ParkCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1998
- City of Crystal v. Fantasy House, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.