Legal Opinion

City of Scottsdale v. Scottsdale Associated Merchants, Inc.

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided July 13, 1978No. 13181PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLOHAN, Justice.

Scottsdale Associated Merchants, appel-lee, brought a declaratory judgment action seeking to have Scottsdale’s zoning ordinance for nonconforming signs declared illegal. After both parties had filed cross motions for summary judgment the trial court ruled in favor of appellee and entered judgment, enjoining the city from enforcing the ordinance. The City of Scottsdale filed a timely appeal. We took jurisdiction pursuant to 17A A.R.S. Sup.Ct.Rules, rule 47(e)(5).

In 1973 the city charter of the City of Scottsdale was amended to provide for the removal of all signs which did not…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hart v. Bayless Investment & Trading CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1959
  2. City of Scottsdale v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Luhrs v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Kubby v. HammondArizona Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Clayton v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. City of Tempe v. Outdoor Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
  2. Libra Group, Inc. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  3. McIntyre v. Mohave CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. City of MesaArizona Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Rotter v. Coconino CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1991

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API