Send us your articles!
Please email any articles or topics that you think we should feature to Editor@ChicagoCodes.com.
Case Law: Adult Bookstore
April 8, 2007 by dwagner · Leave a Comment
City’s restrictions on location of adult-use businesses, which effectively zones such establishments outside of the city, did not violate business owner’s First Amendment rights where adequate alternative locations were available. Read More…
Case Law: Freedom of Speech
August 8, 2005 by dwagner · Leave a Comment
Trial court correctly ruled that the licensing portion of Lake County’s adult use ordinance does not constitute prior restraint and same ordinance’s restrictions related to secondary effects ordinance are justified. Read More…
Case Law: Proximity of Adult Entertainment to Church
July 19, 2004 by dwagner · Leave a Comment
In determining whether defendants violated statute prohibiting adult entertainment facility from being within 1,000 feet of church, trial court correctly held that measurement should be from property line to property line, not from church property line to boundary of defendants’ leasehold on property where business was to be located, which was more than 1,000 feet from church property line. Read More…
Case Law: “Adult” Use
July 1, 2004 by dwagner · Leave a Comment
City zoning ordinance, with dual-purpose restrictions on location, provides for sufficient channels of communication for distribution of sexually explicit materials and therefore is not unconstitutional. Read More…
Case Law: ‘Adult’ Businesses
March 17, 2004 by dwagner · Leave a Comment
Village correctly denied business license for plaintiff’s `dress shop’ which in reality was business selling sexual paraphernalia; business did not fit any business classification under village zoning ordinance, and village reasonably denied issuance of occupancy certificate and business license. Read More…
Case Law: Adult Entertainment
January 11, 2004 by dwagner · Leave a Comment
Trial court properly dismissed plaintiff’s claim that city’s denial of application for burlesque theater featuring nude or semi-nude dancers violated First Amendment; city did not bar plaintiff from operating theater but merely barred operation of such theaters within set distance from residential neighborhoods. Read More…
