Young v. American Mini Theatres, 427 U.S. 50 (1976), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a city ordinance of Detroit, Michigan requiring dispersal of adult businesses throughout the city. Justice Stevens ( writing for the plurality) reasoned that the speech involved here is of lower value, and the ...
American Mini Theaters opened two theaters that showed adult movies in the city of Detroit. Two city ordinances enacted in 1972 prohibited the opening of adult theaters within 1,000 feet of other buildings with "regulated uses" or within 500 feet of any residential district. American Mini sued city officials challenging the ...
Case opinion for US Supreme Court YOUNG v. ... John H. Weston argued the cause for respondents American Mini Theatres, Inc., et al. With him on the ... In addition, they argue that the ordinances are vague because they do not specify adequate procedures or standards for obtaining a waiver of the 1,000-foot restriction.
Jun 7 2013, Brief of respondent United Parcel Service, Inc. in opposition filed. ... Jul 31 2014, Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner. ... Sep 10 2014, Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union and A Better Balance, et al. filed.
American Mini Theatres, Inc., et al. The Supreme Court finds that an appropriately defined zoning ordinance, barring the location of an “adult movie theatre” within 100 feet of any two other “regulated uses,” does not violate the First Amendment —even if the theater is not showing obscene material. In Young v. American Mini ...
Dec 3, 2014 ... In 1999, Respondent United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”) hired Petitioner Peggy Sue Young. Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 707 F.3d 437, 440. ... The Supreme Court's decision will likely impact the safeguards provided to women in the workplace and the efficiency of American businesses in providing ...
Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748, 771 (1976). Here, the Borough totally excludes all live entertainment, including nonobscene nude dancing that is otherwise protected by the First Amendment. As we have observed, Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc., supra, did not purport to approve the total exclusion ...
(* Other defendants D.A.B. Recreational Resort, Inc., and individuals. Schroeder; Bertram; Gibbe; Bremer; Koehn; Libblin and Schmidt). German-American Vocational League, Inc., et al. v. United States,,br>. cert.denied, 328 U.S. 833 ( 1946). United States v. B. Westermann Co., et al., *. (D.D.C. Crim. No. 73084 ( 1944)).
______. HOWARD A. ENGLE, M.D., et al.,. Petitioners, vs. LIGGETT GROUP, INC ., et al.,. Respondents. [December 21, 2006]. REVISED OPINION ... id. at 441. We have jurisdiction because Engle II misapplies our decision in Young v. Miami Beach Improvement Co., 46 So. 2d 26. (Fla. 1950). See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.