Laserfiche WebLink
519 N.W.2d 243 Page l <br /> (Cite as: 519 N. W.2d 243) <br /> DeAnna BRAYTON, Appellant, <br /> v In determining whether government regulation is <br /> CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON, Respondent. content-neutral, government's purpose is controlling <br /> consideration. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. I. <br /> No. CO-94-252. <br /> (3] CONSTTTU'CIONAL LAW ~ 90(3) <br /> Court of Appeals of Minnesota. 92k90(3) <br /> Regulation is content-neutral only if it is justified <br /> July 26, 1994. without reference to content of regulated speech. <br /> U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 1. <br /> Review Denied Sept. 28, 1994. <br /> [4] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 4~ 90(3) <br /> City resident brought action against city 92k90(3) <br /> challenging constitutionality of municipal ordinance Requirement that government regulation burdening <br /> regulating yard signs. The District Court, Ramsey speech be narrowly tailored to meet substantial <br /> County, Gregg E. Johnson, J., granted city's motion goverttmrnt interests is satisfied if regulation <br /> for summary judgment, and resident appealed. The promotes substantial government interest that would <br /> Court of Appeals, Randall, J., held that ordinance, be achieved less effectively absent regulation; <br /> which allowed one noncommercial sign all year long regulation noel not be least restrictive or least <br /> and additional noncommercial signs during election intrusive means of furthering govermttent's <br /> season, did not violate First Amendment. interests. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 1. <br /> Affirmed. [5] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ~ 90(3) <br /> 92k90(3) <br /> [1] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 4~ 90.3 To be constitutionally valid, regulation burdening <br /> 92k90.3 speech must not impair speaker's ability to convey <br /> Municipal ordinance allowing resident to post one message to desired audience; alternative channels of <br /> noncommercial opinion sign on his or her property communication must exist and must be adequate. <br /> at any time, and additional noncommercial signs for U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 1. <br /> each candidate and issue during election season, did <br /> not violate First Amendment on its face; ordinance '244 Syllabus by the Court <br /> was content-neutral, it waz narrowly tailored to meet <br /> significant governmental interests in aesthetic and This New Brighton city ordinance regulating the <br /> traffic safety, and it left open adequate alternative content and placement of yard signs did not violate <br /> charnels of communication. U.S.C.A. wnstimtional principles of free expression. <br /> Const.Amend. 1. <br /> Mark R. Anfinson, Minneapolis, for appellant. <br /> [I] MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS 4~ 602 <br /> 268k602 Charles L. LeFevere, Corrine A. Heine, Holmes <br /> Municipal Ordinance allowing resident to post one 8r Graven, Minneapolis, for respondent. <br /> noncommercial opinion sigrt on his or ha property <br /> at any time, and additional noncommercial signs for Considered and decided by KLAPHAICE, P.l., <br /> <br /> each candidatc and issue during election season, did and RANDALL and NORTON, Jl. <br /> not violate First Amendmwt on its fan; ordinance <br /> was content-neutral, it was narrowly tailored to meet OPINION <br /> significant governmental interests in aesthetics and <br /> <br /> traffic safety, and it left open adequate alternative RANDALL, Judge. <br /> <br /> channels of communication. U.S.C.A. <br /> <br /> Const.Amend.l. Appellant DeAma Brayton commenced this <br /> litigation seeking declaratory and injunctive relief <br /> [2] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 4~r 90(3) against respondent City of New Brighton (the City), <br /> <br /> 92k90(3) asserting that a city ordinance regulating the content <br /> and placement of signs was unconstitutional. On the <br /> Copr. a West 1996 No claim to orig. U.S. govt. works <br /> <br />