Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-City’s motion to preliminarily enjoin plaintiff from installing billboard without complying with ordinance that required plaintiff to obtain sign permit prior to constructing billboard. While plaintiff argued that ordinance’s ban on plaintiff constructing instant “off premises” sign or instant pole sign constituted violation of 1st Amendment, Dist. Ct. could properly enter instant restraining order until Dist. Ct. could rule on plaintiff’s 1st Amendment claims. Moreover, Dist. Ct. properly rejected plaintiff’s motion for entry of preliminary injunction on its procedural due process claim based on its contention that stop work order drafted by defendant failed to include certain information, since such claim had no likelihood of success, where: (1) plaintiff had no constitutional due process right to defendant’s compliance with state mandated procedures; and (2) plaintiff had post-deprivation remedy under Indiana Tort Claims Act to address its alternative procedural due process claim that defendant’s issuance of arrest threats improperly served to stop plaintiff from constructing billboard. Ct also observed that defendant’s threats of arrest were too tepid to support substantive due process claim.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
First Amendment