Support for LAist comes from
We Explain L.A.
Stay Connected

Share This

This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.

This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.


A Billboard Win for L.A.

We need to hear from you.
Today, put a dollar value on the trustworthy reporting you rely on all year long. The local news you read here every day is crafted for you, but right now, we need your help to keep it going. In these uncertain times, your support is even more important. We can't hold those in power accountable and uplift voices from the community without your partnership. Thank you.

One lawsuit won, some 20 to go. A federal judge sided with Los Angeles in the never-ending battle over billboards this week. It was one of the three lawsuits filed by World Wide Rush, which "argued that it had a right to erect new signs or supergraphics because it requested permits during a four-month period in late 2008" when no ban was in effect, explained the LA Times. "Under the company’s logic, their applications were wrongly denied — therefore they should have a right to put up new supergraphics or signs now even though the city has a ban in place." But Judge Audrey B. Collins said companies can't install signs if no permits were issues. And in any case, it was unclear if the city had actually denied the permits.

Most Read