Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

California’s 90-Day Limitations Period for Zoning Challenges Does Not Apply in Facial Attack on San Diego Sign Ordinance

By Brian J. Connolly on March 22, 2016
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

ArchitectureArt, LLC is a mural painting company that painted wall murals on buildings in San Diego, California.  In 2011, ArchitectureArt painted two wall murals without any objection from the city, but a third mural painted in honor of Comic-Con was cited by the city after Comic-Con complained.  In 2012, two of five murals painted by ArchitectureArt also received citations.  In 2013, ArchitectureArt received permits for three murals, but those permits were later rescinded.  In late 2013, ArchitectureArt filed suit against the city for violations of the Free Speech Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, the Due Process Clause, and intentional interference with business advantage.  The city moved to dismiss the case on the grounds that the claims were barred by the California Government Code’s 90-day limitations period for challenging city zoning decisions and the city’s own limitations period for a writ of mandate.  In denying the motion to dismiss, the court relied on well-established case law that claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 borrow the forum state’s limitations period for personal injury claims—which in California is two years—and furthermore, that a facial violation of the First Amendment constitutes a continuing harm until the statute or code is repealed or invalidated.

ArchitectureArt, LLC v. City of San Diego, No. 15-CV-1592-BAS-NLS, Slip Op., 2016 WL 1077124 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2016).

Photo of Brian J. Connolly Brian J. Connolly

Brian Connolly represents public- and private-sector clients in matters relating to zoning, planning, development entitlements and other complex regulatory issues.  Brian’s practice encompasses a broad range of land use matters including zoning compliance, rezonings and other regulatory amendments, planned-unit developments, development agreements, private…

Brian Connolly represents public- and private-sector clients in matters relating to zoning, planning, development entitlements and other complex regulatory issues.  Brian’s practice encompasses a broad range of land use matters including zoning compliance, rezonings and other regulatory amendments, planned-unit developments, development agreements, private covenants and restrictions, land use and zoning litigation, initiatives and referenda associated with land use approvals, and real estate transactions.  Brian additionally specializes in the First Amendment and land use issues associated with outdoor sign and advertising regulation, and fair housing matters in local planning and zoning.

Read more about Brian J. ConnollyEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Communications, Media & Entertainment
  • Blog:
    Rocky Mountain Sign Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti PC
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo