Posted by: Patricia Salkin | November 9, 2010

Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes that Unsuccessful Billboard Applicant Lacks Standing For Failure to Challenge Secondary Restrictions

An unsuccessful billboard applicant brought action against the township, challenging the constitutionality of the township’s billboard ordinance. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that the applicant’s alleged injury was not redressable and therefore he lacked standing to challenge the billboard ordinance. The court found that although the Plaintiff had suffered an injury that was traceable to the Township’s application of its ordinance, the injury would not be redressable because the Plaintiff could not demonstrate a substantial likelihood that the requested relief will remedy the alleged injury in fact. In citing Harp Advertising Illinois, Inc. v. Village of Chicago Ridge (9 F.3d 1290, 1993), the court found that lack of standing is established where a plaintiff could not establish that any relief would satisfy redressability because of another valid ordinance already in place would still prohibit the billboard from being constructed. In the case at hand, the Plaintiff failed to challenge a second ordinance that would also prohibit their construction through setback and height restrictions.

Coastal Outdoor Advertising Group, LLC. v. Township of East Hanover, 2010 WL 4017037 (3rd Cir. Ct. App. 10/14/2010) 

The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/093242np.pdf


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: