Legal Opinion
City of Kettering v. Lamar Outdoor Advertising, Inc.
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided November 12, 1987No. 10144PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrogan, J.
The instant appeal involves the constitutionality of a municipal ordinance which requires that a nonconforming advertising sign or structure damaged in excess of one half of its replacement value be reconstructed in accordance with present existing municipal zoning ordinances.
In the early 1960s, Lamar Advertising of Dayton, Inc. constructed an advertising sign in the city of Kettering, Ohio. In 1971, the area where the sign was located was zoned as an industrial district, to wit, “M.”
In 1957, the Ohio Legislature enacted R.C. 713.15, which read (see 127 Ohio Laws 18, 19):
“The lawful use of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hadacheck v. SebastianSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- State v. EleyOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- Franchise Developers, Inc. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- Pritz v. MesserOhio Supreme Court · 1925
- Village of Hudson v. Albrecht, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Chioffi v. City of WinooskiSupreme Court of Vermont · 1996
- Beck v. Springfield Township Board of Zoning AppealsOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
- Key Ads, Inc. v. Dayton Bd. of Zoning AppealsOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- Gem City Metal Spinning v. Dayton Bd., 22083 (1-18-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- Ledford v. Board of Zoning AppealsOhio Court of Appeals · 2007
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.