Clear Channel sues Baltimore over billboard tax
Clear Channel is fighting to keep Lady Gaga staring at you on the highway under the protection of the First Amendment.
August 20, 2013 at 06:53 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Ever been driving down the highway in Baltimore and noticed Lady Gaga staring back at you? Chances are, that billboard is the work of media firm Clear Channel Outdoor. And now, Clear Channel is fighting to keep Lady Gaga staring under the protection of the First Amendment.
The Baltimore Sun says Clear Channel has filed suit in U.S. District Court against the city of Baltimore, claiming the city's new billboard tax is unconstitutional and billboards should be protected as free speech. Baltimore imposed a tax starting last month on billboard advertisements within the city limits—$15 per square foot for electronic billboards and $5 per square foot for standard billboards.
Baltimore levied the tax as part of a plan to close the city's $750 million budget shortfall. As part of the tax, city officials expect to take in $1 million annually from Clear Channel alone. The company owns roughly 95 percent of Baltimore's billboard advertising.
Clear Channel doesn't see those terms as fair. According to General Counsel Sara Lee Keller, this litigation “is not something we do lightly, or we use as a sword. Municipalities have been really pressed for revenue. There are many different ways to approach this issue. Assessing a fee against one payer is not the way to do it.”
City officials said they expected this type of legal challenge from Clear Channel. The company threatened litigation back in April if the measure passed, and Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rowlings-Blake denied Clear Channel's offer of $1 million in free advertising for the city in lieu of the tax.
Baltimore isn't the only city Clear Channel has fought over this type of tax. Clear Channel was part of a group of media providers that sued Philadelphia in 2005, and the company went after Los Angeles' similar law in 2002. In both cases, the parties settled the suit out of court.
Read more about this story in The Baltimore Sun.
InsideCounsel has the First Amendment covered. For more news stories, check out:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250