Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-Village’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s action, alleging that Village’s ordinance that banned issuance of new permits to build new billboards violated its First Amendment, equal protection and due process rights, where plaintiff had leased land with intention to build new billboard. Plaintiff lost its lease during pendency of case, and thus its request for injunctive relief from sign ban became moot. Also, plaintiff’s request for money relief arising out of sign ban was time-barred, where applicable limitations period was two years, and plaintiff waited four years from enactment of instant ordinance to file instant lawsuit. Also, plaintiff could not establish viable equal protection action, even though Village accepted competitor’s bid to lease property that could have new billboard erected, since plaintiff was not similarly-situated to competitor, where competitor offered lump sum payment of $800,000 for said lease, while plaintiff offered $1.1 million in installments payments over 40-year period.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
First Amendment