Legal Opinion
Maldonado v. Morales
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 25, 2009No. 06-15657, 07-15535PublishedCited by 75 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge:
Nano Maldonado has raised a number of constitutional challenges to the California Outdoor Advertising Act. Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 5200, et seq. As a consequence of a legislative amendment in 2008, the Act bars offsite commercial advertising but does not restrict non-commercial speech. Cal. Bus. & Prof.Code § 5275. Although some of Maldonado’s claims are now moot because of this amendment, he continues to challenge application of the Act to his effort to display off-premises advertising on a highway billboard. This appeal is Maldonado’s second trip to our court and…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Califano v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Steffel v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Hunt v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Autotel v. Nevada Bell Telephone CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Maya Arce v. John HuppenthalCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Greater Los Angeles Agency on Deafness, Inc. v. Cable News Network, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce v. City of Long BeachCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.