Dist. Ct. did not err in denying plaintiffs’ request for preliminary injunction in their section 1983 action alleging that defendants violated their First Amendment rights by amending certain zoning ordinances that precluded plaintiffs from operating adult-entertainment business from location of their recently-purchased restaurant. Plaintiffs attacked 750-foot residence buffer-zone requirement contained in one ordinance, and record showed that plaintiffs were unlikely to prevail on merits of case, since: (1) plaintiffs failed to present any evidence to contest defendants’ evidence that subject ordinances were designed to reduce negative secondary effects of adult entertainment establishments; and (2) defendants identified several other land parcels where adult-entertainment businesses could operate under amended ordinances.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
First Amendment