Livingston City Council received an update from the city attorney on its three pending lawsuits surrounding the city’s sign ordinance.
City Attorney Andre Greppin said a billboard company out of Cookeville filed a chancery court lawsuit against the city several months ago after the city’s Board of Zoning Appeals upheld a decision denying the company’s request to build digital advertising signs, as they were deemed flashing signs. Greppin said the company has also filed a related lawsuit in federal court. Greppin said that the outcome of the case could mirror the result of a similar lawsuit filed in 2018.
“He then filed suit in chancery court, chancery court dismissed that lawsuit,” Greppin said. “He appealed to the court of appeals, the court of appeals affirmed that dismissal. He filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging the same causes of action, the federal judge dismissed that lawsuit, and we expect a similar result here.”
Greppin said the city has filed a motion to dismiss both lawsuits, and the city has not received any response from the billboard company. Greppin said the city will take the necessary steps to resolve the suits and continue to defend the city’s sign ordinance.
“These lawsuits are a result of the parties involved just not wanting to comply with the law,” Greppin said. “And that the only way the city could have avoided any of these lawsuits was just to ignore its own law, which is just not an option.”
Greppin said the billboard company’s deadline to respond to the dismissal is February 12.
Greppin said the other suit involves the tractor-trailer at the intersection of North Church Street and Bradford Hicks Drive. Greppin said the city filed a lawsuit against the property owner in chancery court after the city had made several attempts to have the property owner comply over the past several years.
“He simply refused to do so, so the city had no choice but to file a lawsuit in chancery court in July or August of last year, requesting an order from the court requiring the property owner to bring that property into compliance and refrain from any future violations of the municipal code,” Greppin said. “The owner filed a countersuit against the city, and the city has replied to that, and that suit remains pending.”
Greppin said the public should not expect an immediate resolution to the cases as the judicial system takes time.