Posted by: Patricia Salkin | May 10, 2015

Fed. Dist. Court in NJ Finds initial Denial of Permit for Adult Entertainment Facility was Not Discriminatory and Did Not Violate Constitutional Protections

Plaintiff Harding Brass, LLC, operated an adult entertainment facility and juice bar in Hamilton Township. Harding Brass applied for a business license and repair permits in 2013; however, the zoning board originally denied the application. In 2014, after this lawsuit was filed, Harding Brass reapplied and received a favorable decision. Hamilton Township then moved for summary judgment.

The issue that faced the Board was whether Harding Brass’ use of the subject property as an adult entertainment establishment was a preexisting nonconforming use. The factual inquiry focused on whether, from July 1985 to the present, the property had been continuously used as an adult entertainment establishment, and Harding Brass had the burden of proof. Despite this, there was no tangible evidence presented confirming the facility was used for this purpose from 1985 to 2000. The application was therefore denied. However, on February 24, 2014, the Board held another hearing on the zoning application. At this new meeting Harding Brass presented testimony from 10 witnesses and an Atlantic City Press article in support of its application. As a result of this new evidence the permit was unanimously approved.

Here, the court found that the Board Members based their September 23, 2013 decision on a content-neutral reason: the insufficiency of Harding Brass’ evidence concerning continuous use—irrespective of what that “use” was. Thus, there was no evidence in the record supporting an inference that the Board or Township acted for a reason prohibited by the First Amendment when the Board originally denied Harding Brass’ application. Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment was granted.

Harding Brass, LLC v Zoning Board of Adjustment of the Township of Hamilton, 2015 WL 1835318 (DNJ 4/23/2015)

The opinion can be accessed at: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-jersey/njdce/1:2013cv06211/295543/18/

See also, http://www.njlawjournal.com/id=1202724407835/Township-Wasnt-Biased-Against-Strip-Club-Court-Says?slreturn=20150410082905


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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: