Legal Opinion
Currence v. City of Cincinnati
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided January 24, 2002No. Nos. 00-3985, 00-4041PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Plaintiff-appellant Greyson Currence appeals the grant of summary judgment to the defendant, the City of Cincinnati, on Currence’s claim for a violation of his First Amendment rights. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Currence is a male out-call dancer who owns and operates an exotic dance business. Currence provides nude, exotic dancing services in homes or hotel rooms for paying customers. (J.A. at 156, 163-64). He challenges Cincinnati Municipal Ordinance No. 230-1996, codified at Chapter 899 of the Municipal Code. This…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. O'BrienSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Family Trust Foundation of Kentucky, Inc. v. WolnitzekDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2004
- Nebraska ex rel. Bruning v. United States Department of Health & Human ServicesDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 2012
- Deja Vu of Cincinnati, L.L.C. v. Union Township Board of TrusteesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Sullivan v. City of AugustaDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2005
- Deja Vu of Kentucky, Inc. v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County GovernmentDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.