Lim

Lim v. City of Long Beach

Good Law
2000 Daily Journal DAR 6894·217 F.3d 1050·2000 WL 821295·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5155·2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 14629
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 27, 2000No. 98-55915California2,516 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hawkins, J.

The owners of three adult book and video stores and an adult mini-theater (collectively “Plaintiffs”) sued the City of *1053 Long Beach (“Long Beach”) challenging the constitutionality of a Long Beach zoning ordinance restricting the locations in which adult businesses can operate. The district court found that the ordinance did not violate the Plaintiffs’ rights under the First Amendment or the Equal Protection Clause. We remand to allow Plaintiffs to develop and present evidence concerning the availability of alternative commercial locations in the Long Beach real-estate market.

BACKGROUND

In 1994, Long Beach amended its existing adult entertainment zoning ordinance 1 by modifying the locational restrictions on adult businesses. The new ordinance provided that an adult entertainment business 2 may not be located within (1) 300 feet of a residential zoning district or a residential planned development district; (2) 1,000 feet of any public or private school; (3) 600 feet of any city park; (4) 500 feet of a church; or (5) 1,000 feet of any other adult entertainment business. See Long Beach Municipal Code (“LBMC”) § 21.45.110(A)(1). The ordinance further provided that an adult…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.