Prologue — City of Knoxville v. Entertainment Resources, LLC

IN Supreme Court, U.S.

FILED

U5410 SEP 27 2005

No. 05 OFFICE OF THE CLERK

In the

Supreme Court of the United States

Ciry OF KNOXVILLE,

Petitioner,

Vv.

ENTERTAINMENT Resources, LLC,

d/b/a Fantasy Video,

Respondent.

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

to the Supreme Court of Tennessee

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Scott D. BERGTHOLD

Counsel of Record

Law OFFICE OF

Scotr D. BerctHoLp, P.L.L.C.

8052 STANDIFER GaP ROAD

Surre C

CHATTANOOGA, TN 37421

(423) 899-3025

(423) 899-3029 Fax

September 27, 2005

Becker Gallagher Legal Publishing, Inc. 800.890.5001

i

QUESTION PRESENTED

This Petition involves a challenge by an adult book store

to City of Knoxville Code section. 16-468, which governs the

location of sexually oriented businesses, including those that

meet the definition of “adult bookstore.” Under the

ordinance, an “adult bookstore” is an establishment “having

as a substantial or significant portion of its stock and trade

- books, magazines and other periodicals, videotapes or other

electronic media which are distinguished or characterized by

their emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to

specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas . . . .”

The Question Presented is:

Did the Supreme Court of Tennessee err as a matter of

law in holding the phrase “substantial or significant portion of

its stock and trade” within the City’s definition of “adult

bookstore” is unconstitutionally vague?

il

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS BELOW

The parties to the proceeding below are completely set

forth in the caption. .

e+e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EO Sy SERRE Ey gay i

Parties to the Proceedings Below ............... il

UND SS Sees NS OUTS Ce be cows iii

Table of Authorities . . bene eee teen eee v

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari ................ ]

Ee J 5a ew eer s tin + TNO Kee ]

SD SE UD 6 gc ocd ia riedodve wens l

Relevant Constitutional, Statutory, and

SURO DUONIIINID 0505-0» owed Cotes > aeles l

SS SEGRE 606 8 cece ee eee Ve tee en 3

Reasons for Granting the Petition ............... 9

I. The Decision of the Tennessee Supreme Court

on an Important Federal Question Conflicts

with the Decisions of United States Courts of

Appeals and of Several State Appellate Courts

II. The Tennessee Supreme Couft Erred as a

SU NEMS os Wwe wok elma weer 12

‘Ill. |The Question Presented is Important to Cities

REE GR COG 30.66 ec ctnee ede be 16

I io ia ae a gt ee ap NESS aa ht hal TES 5 18

Appendix

Appendix A - Tennessee Supreme Court Opinion

PPR Tre eye ee es oe la

Appendix B - Tennesseé Court of Appeals Opinion

DE AARITOR i iS ce war hse e ere rewtibwer 30a

Appendix C - Knox County Chancery Court

Memorandum Opinion and Order

I 88 5a FOE EERE REO 49a

Appendix D - Knox County Chancery Court

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

SE RETIUOOE: 6c vhs Medic dwerke Caw ues 53a

Appendix E - Knox County Chancery Court

dg POP PEE EEC OEE DERE T 70a

Appendix F - Knox County Chancery Court

Order Granting Temporary Injunction

DO TI CUIS 6. EES MERC Vs ORT RAO 96a

Appendix G - Knoxville Ordinance 16-468 .... 108a

v

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Central Ave. News, Inc. v. City of Minot,

G51 F.26 SES GE Cer. BGI) oc nec ccwcevces 17

City of Chicago v. Scandia Books, Inc.,

102 Ill. App. 3d 292, 430 N.E.2d 14,

58 Ill. Dec. 72 (Ill. Ct. App. 1981) ........... 11

City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc.,

OS A eer re 17

City of New York v. Hommes, 94 N.Y .2d 267,

roy Sk & hf | eee 15, 16

Coates v. City of Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611 (1971) .... 13

Dandy Co., Inc. v. City of South Bend,

401 N.E.2d 1380 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980) ......... ll

511 Detroit Street, Inc. v. Kelley,

S07 F.24 1293 (Gth Cir. 1986). ...........-..-. 10

105 Floyd Rd., Inc. v. Crisp County,

oe e bo ye Be errs 12

For the People Theatres of N.Y., Inc. v. City of New York,

20 A.D.3d 1,

793 N.Y.S.2d 356 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005) .... 15-16

Gammoh v. City of La Habra,

pe ath. le | ere 14

vi

Golden Triangle News, Inc. v. Corbett,

689 A.2d 974 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1997),

aff'd 717 A.2d 1023 (Pa. 1998) ........ 11, 15, 16

Grayned v. City of Rockford,

ok er ae 12, 13, 15

Hart Book Stores, Inc. v. Edmisten,

yk RR ee Pere ee 13

Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703 (2000) ........ 13, 16

ILQ Investments, Inc. v. City of Rochester,

SP SG a BO. awa ctbeekctwn 9

Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983) .......... 4

Phillips v. Borough of Keyport,

107 F.36 164 Gd Cir. 1997) 2. ccc cc ccccccs: 17

Renaissance Arcade & Bookstore v. County of Cook,

ge BG PR A ee ee 17

State v. Hanna,

901 So. 2d 201 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005) .......... 14

15192 Thirteen Mile Rd., Inc. v. City of Warren,

626 F. Supp. 803 (E.D. Mich. 1985) .......... 10

United States v. Salisbury,

983 F.2d 1369 (6th Cir. 1993)............ 12-13

Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.,

oe Serres bre er 13

vii

Young v.. -\ rican Mini Theatres, Inc.,

Gar Bek Sean winedesaes 11, 12, 16, 17, 18

Z.J. Gifts D-2, L.L.C. v. City of Aurora,

93 P.3d 633 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004) ........ 11, 15

Constitutional Provisions

» Re OY RE Serre Py Pr or rr rs er 4

OR. Cee: ME, 8 ec oes oa ck eK KeR 2, 8,9

Tie en GENRE, BEY soe ncce eee chk ewes 1, 4, 12

Federal Statute

Ae Oks ET 60 kh 6 44N5S 6 OR ARMOR ]

Municipal Codes"

Bayport, Minn. Code § 10-51 (2005) ............. 17

Belmont, Cal. Code § 4-75(e) (2004) ............. 17

Bristol, Conn. Code § 13-102 (2005) ............. 17

Carthage, Mo. Code § 25-801(1) (2003) ........... 17

Cincinnati, Ohio, Code § 899-1-Al (2003) ......... 17

Corpus Christi, Tex. Code § 48-2 (2005) .......... 17

Griffin, Ga. Code § 10-32 (2005) ............... 17

Henderson, Ky. Code § 2.5-2 (2002) ............. 17

Holvoke, Mass. Code App. A § 2 (2004) .......... 17

Kalamazoo, Mich. Code App. A § 1B.2(b) (2004) .... 17

Knoxville, fenn. Code § 16-468(a) .............. 2

Knoxville, Tenn. Code § 16-468(b) .............. 3

Lake Worth, Fla. Code § 23.02.03.00 (2005) ....... 17

Norfolk, Va. Code App. A § 2-3 (2005)........... 17

viii

Surfside Beach, S.C. Code § 17-298 (2005) ........ 17

Tonawanda, N.Y. Code § 82-381 (2004) .......... 17

West Chicago, Ill. Code App. A, Art. IV (2005) ..... 17

1

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

The City of Knoxville respectfully petitions for a writ of

certiorari to review the judgment of the Tennessee Supreme

Court in this case.

OPINIONS BELOW

The Tennessee Supreme Court’s opinion is published at

166 S.W.3d 650. Pet. App. la-29a. The opinions and orders

of the Tennessee Court of Appeals, Pet. App. 30a-48a, and

the Knox County Chancery Court, Pet. App. 49a-107a, are

unpublished.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Supreme Court of Tennessee entered its opinion on

June 29, 2005. This court has jurisdiction to review on a writ

of certiorari the decision in question pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1257.

RELEVANT CONSTITUTIONAL, STATUTORY, AND

REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Section one of the Fourteenth Amendment to the

Constitution of the United States provides:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States,

and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of

the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall

abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the

United States; nor shall any State deprive any person

of life, liberty, or property, without due process of

2

law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the

equal protection of the laws.

U.S. Const. amend XIV, § 1.

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United

States provides:

Congress shall make no law respecting an

establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,

or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to

assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress

of grievances.

U.S. Const. amend. I.

Subsection (a) of Knoxville City Code section 16-468

provides:

Adult bookstore means an establishment having as a

substantial or significant portion of its stock and trade

books, magazines and other periodicals, videotapes or

other electronic media which are designated or

characterized by their emphasis on matter depicting,

describing or relating to specified sexual activities or

specified anatomical areas, or an establishment with a

segment or a section devoted to the sale or display of

such material.

Knoxville City Code § 16-468(a).

Subsection (b) of Knoxville City Code section 16-468

provides:

3

It shall be unlawful to establish, operate or maintain

any adult business, that is, adult bookstore, adult

motion picture theatre, adult mini motion picture

theatre or adult cabaret, within the city, if the

proposed location is within one thousand (1,000) feet

of:

(1) A residentially zoned district;

(2) Any area of amusement which caters to family

entertainment;

(3) Any area which is devoted in part or exclusively to

recreational activity;

(4) Any school, park, church, mortuary or hospital;

(5) Any adult business as defined by this section; or

(6) Any other regulated use, including but not limited to

establishments authorized to sell any alcoholic beverages

for on- or off-premises consumption. Any location selling

beverages that contain less than five (5) percent alcohol

are not to be considered with regard to the required

spacing.

Knoxville City Code § 16-468(b).

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This case presents the important question of whether a

municipal ordinance that regulates the location of sexually

oriented businesses must set forth a specific percentage of an

establishment’s stock and trade that is sexually oriented in

order for the establishment to be classified as an adult

bookstore. The Tennessee Supreme Court held that the City’s

ordinance is unconstitutionally vague because the court

concluded that the phrase “substantial or significant portion”

is not susceptible to a narrowing interpretation and fails to

provide adequate guidance to sexually oriented businesses and

law enforcement. Although the decision submitted for review