Elevue v. City of Los Angeles CA2/7

Filed 11/22/21 Elevue v. City of Los Angeles CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

ELEVUE, INC., B302598

Petitioner and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BS164627) v.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al.,

Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, James C. Chalfant, Judge. Dismissed. Gary S. Mobley, by appointment, for Petitioner and Appellant. Michael N. Feuer, City Attorney, Terry Kaufmann Macias, Senior Assistant City Attorney and Kenneth T. Fong, Deputy City Attorney, for Respondents.

____________________

INTRODUCTION Elevue, Inc.’s business is posting temporary advertising signs at construction sites. Los Angeles Municipal Code section 14.4.17 (section 14.4.17) authorizes those signs. The trial court issued a writ of mandate striking down section 14.4.17 as unconstitutional. Elevue appealed. Because the City of Los Angeles (City) amended section 14.4.17 in its entirety and reinstated the section after the writ was issued, the appeal is dismissed as moot. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Elevue erects temporary advertising signs at construction sites. The signs are authorized by section 14.4.17. The City gave Elevue a permit and renewal permit to post signs on a property. But the City ultimately revoked Elevue’s renewal permit because Elevue did not have a letter of consent from the Director of the Office of Community Beautification (Director), which was required under section 14.4.17, subdivision (C)(iii), at the time. Elevue petitioned for a writ of mandate to reinstate the renewal permit. Elevue argued subdivision (C)(iii) was unconstitutional because it did not have objective standards to govern the Director’s consent. After a hearing on May 30, 2019, the trial court granted Elevue’s petition. The court found requiring the Director’s consent without objective standards was an unconstitutional prior restraint of speech under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and ordered the City to reinstate Elevue’s renewal permit for the sign. But rather than sever subdivision (C)(iii) from section 14.4.17, the court struck down the section. The order provided in relevant part: