ILNews

SCOTUS declines New Albany ordinance case

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Supreme Court of the United States won’t take a case from New Albany about the city’s battle to close an adult book and movie store.

Denying a writ of certiorari request in New Albany v. New Albany DVD LLC, No. 09-1027, the nation’s top justices declined to accept a case from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. The SCOTUS allowed the Indiana Family Institute and International Municipal Lawyers Association to file amicus briefs in the case, but denied the petition for writ of certiorari. This was the second case the justices declined to take from Indiana last week.

That means a 7th Circuit decision from September remains in place; the city must present clear evidence that the adult bookstore is causing excessive litter, crime, or other problems before it can impose additional restrictions on its operations. The store can remain open pending a hearing on those issues. Judge Sarah Evans Barker in Indianapolis had ruled against the city, granting an injunction that stopped New Albany from enforcing its ordinance and allowing the store to remain open.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT