Prime Media, Inc. v. City of Brentwood, Tennessee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a court’s order invalidating part of a city billboard ordinance did not moot a claim for damages arising from that invalidated portion of the ordinance
• holding that a court’s order invalidating part of a city billboard ordinance did not moot a claim for damages arising from that invalidated portion of the ordinance
• holding that a court’s order invalidating part of a city billboard ordinance did not moot a claim for damages arising from that invalidated portion of the ordinance
• noting that this Court has previously found that “an incomplete (yet content- neutral) ban nonetheless directly advanced legitimate interests”
• holding that billboard regulations “leave open ample alternative communication because they permit billboards that satisfy the height and size restrictions ... and do not affect any individual’s freedom to exercise the right to speak and to distribute literature” in the area regulated
• noting that the case involved a challenge to an ordinance “that restricts the size and height of billboards” and holding that the ordinance was content-neutral because it “regulate[d] only the non-expressive components of billboards”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).