Legal Opinion
City of Fayetteville v. S & H, INC.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided February 28, 1977No. 76-82PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Conley Byrd, Justice.
By this appeal the City of Fayetteville raises two issues — i.e. (1) can a sign ordinance prohibiting flashing or blinking signs be applied to existing signs at the time the ordinance becomes effective and (2) can a non-conforming “on-site” sign be constitutionally amortized by the City over a period of seven years? These issues were submitted to the trial court upon a stipulated record and from a judgment holding that such interests were vested and that the sign ordinance could not constitutionally be applied to such vested interests, the City appeals.
Ordinance No. 1893…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- People v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
- Grant v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1957
- E. B. Elliott Adv. Co., Henry F. Hill, Intervenor-Appellant v. Metropolitan Dade County, a Political Subdivision of the State of FloridaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Silver v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- Hoffmann v. KinealySupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- City of Fayetteville v. McIlroy Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
- Whiteco Outdoor Advertising v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
- Donrey Communications Co. v. City of FayettevilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
- Mayor & Council of New Castle v. Rollins Outdoor Advertising, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- City of Fayetteville v. McIlroy Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.