Ice Embassy Inc. v. City of Houston

Full title: ICE EMBASSY INCORPORATED; Texas Richmond Corporation; HFR Enterprises…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Aug 20, 2007

236 F. App'x 118 (5th Cir. 2007)

Opinion

No. 07-20329.

August 20, 2007.

James Vincent Pianelli, Pianelli Law Firm, Houston, TX, for Intervenor-Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Patrick Andrew Zummo, Zummo Midkiff, Houston, TX, for Intervenor Defendant-Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, USDC No. 4:97-CV-196.

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:[fn*] [fn*] Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

This case was remanded to determine whether the City of Houston ("the City") could demonstrate that its 1997 ordinance regulating sexually-oriented businesses ("SOBs") did not seek to reduce the secondary effects of SOBs "by depriving SOBs of reasonable avenues of communication." N.W. Enters., Inc. v. City of Houston, 352 F.3d 162, 183 (5th Cir. 2003) (citing City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc., 535 U.S. 425, 451, 122 S.Ct. 1728, 152 L.Ed.2d 670 (2002)). Following a ten-day bench trial, the district court found that the City had carried its burden. See Ice Embassy, et al v. City of Houston, No. 4:97-CV-196, 2007 WL 2175328, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6894, at *63-65 (S.D.Tex. Jan. 31, 2007). Certain SOBs appealed and we heard oral argument. We now AFFIRM the district court's finding, essentially for the reasons articulated by the district court in its opinion below.