THG Enterprises Inc. v. City of El Cajon

Good Law
60 F. App'x 711
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 4, 2003No. 02-55043, 02-55357; D.C. No. CV-00-01781-IEJ(AJB), CV-00-01781-IEJCalifornia440 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

The City of El Cajon appeals the district court’s order and judgment that: (1) the City’s ordinance regarding real estate signs placed in the public “parkway” is unconstitutionally vague; (2) the City’s ordinance regarding “community service signs” is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech; and (3) the City’s ordinance banning temporary political signs is an unconstitutional restriction on speech.

THG Enterprises and Jim Harnsberger (collectively “THG”) cross-appeal the district court’s determination regarding appropriate attorney’s fees.

We affirm the district court’s decision that the City’s Municipal Code § 17.66.020(F)(7) is unconstitutionally vague as applied to signs on public property. The ordinance’s use of the phrase “[i]f an off-site real estate sign is located on private property” implies that an off-site real estate sign could also be on public property. But the ordinance’s restrictive structure and purpose suggest the opposite. Thus, a person of ordinary intelligence would not reasonably know whether placing an off-site real estate sign on public property is prohibited. See Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc., 455…

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.