Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00599/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00599-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 950
Nature of Suit: Contitutionality of State Statutes
Cause of Action: 28:1983 Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CALIFORNIA STATE OUTDOOR 

ADVERTISING ASSOCIATION, INC., 

et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No.: 2:05-CV-00599-FCD-DAD 

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT 

“AS MODIFIED” 

The Court issues final judgment in favor of Plaintiffs California Outdoor 

Advertising Association, Inc. (“CSOAA”), and its members Arcturus Outdoor 

Advertising (“Arcturus”), Bulletin Displays, LLC (“Bulletin”), Clear Channel 

Outdoor, Inc. (“Clear Channel”), Fairway Outdoor Advertising, Inc. (“Fairway”), 

General Outdoor advertising, Inc. (“General”, James N. Hoff dba Hoff Outdoor 

Advertising (“Hoff”), Hunter Media Outdoor Advertising (“Hunter”), Lamar 

Central Outdoor, Inc. (“Lamar”), J.R. Zukin Corporation dba Meadow Outdoor 

Advertising (“Meadow”), Sun Outdoor Advertising (“Sun”), Stott Outdoor 

Case 2:05-cv-00599-FCD-DAD Document 85 Filed 03/16/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 

 - 2 - 

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT

Advertising (“Stott”), Tital Advertising (“Titan”), Van Wagner Communications, 

LLC, dba Van Wagner Outdoor, erroneously named as Van Wagner 

Communications, Inc. (“VW”), Van Wagner/Goodman, LLC, erroneously named 

Van Wagner Communications, Inc. (“VW/Goodman”), Viacom Outdoor, Inc. 

(“Viacom”), and United Outdoor Advertising (“United”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) 

and against defendants State of California, Department of Transportation 

(“Caltrans”) and Will Kempton, in his official capacity as Director of Caltrans 

(collectively “Defendants”) as follows: 

1. Declaratory Relief

The annual permit renewal fee for outdoor advertising displays of $92 per 

permit announced by Caltrans on or about June 2, 2003 (the “Fee”) is void because 

it was not promulgated in accordance with the California Administrative Procedure 

Act, California Government Code Section 11340 et seq. 

2. Injunctive Relief

Defendants and their agents and employees, and all persons acting in concert 

with them, are permanently enjoined from collecting, or making any attempt to 

collect the Fee, and from imposing or attempting to impose any penalties 

whatsoever for nonpayment of the Fee. 

3. Fee Refund and Interest

As of March 2, 2006, Plaintiffs are entitled to refunds of fees from Caltrans, 

together with interest of 7% per annum pursuant to Article XV, § 19 of the 

California Constitution as follows: 

Plaintiff Amount

Prejudgment 

Interest As of Date 

of the Judgment Total

Arcturus $ 6,264 $ 945.95 $ 7,209.95 

Bulletin $ 9,576 $ 1,211.09 $ 10,787.09 

Clear Channel $ 361,704 $ 49,848.00 $ 411,552.55 

Fairway $ 30,600 $ 4,915.89 $ 35,515.89 

Case 2:05-cv-00599-FCD-DAD Document 85 Filed 03/16/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 - 

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT

Plaintiff Amount

Prejudgment 

Interest As of Date 

of the Judgment Total

General $ 24,696 $ 3,513.54 $ 28,209.54 

Hoff $ 4,464 $ 730.12 $ 5,194.12 

Hunter $ 1,152 $ 169.21 $ 1,321.21 

Lamar $ 392,976 $ 56,236.50 $ 449,212.50 

Meadow $ 2,376 $ 326.87 $ 2,702.87 

Stott $ 66,528 $ 9,368.30 $ 75,896.30 

Sun $ 14,256 $ 1,718.34 $ 15,974.34 

Titan $ 2,736 $ 428.94 $ 3,164.94 

VW $ 5,688 $ 714.77 $ 6,402.77 

VW/Goodman $ 4,320 $ 548.46 $ 4, 868.46 

Viacom $ 724,368 $ 97,841.53 $ 822,209.53 

United $ 7,920 $ 1,118.60 $ 9,038.60 

TOTAL $1,659,624.00 $229,636.66 $1,889,260.66 

Plaintiffs are also entitled to recover post judgment interest as permitted by 

law after March 2, 2006. 

4. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Plaintiffs are awarded $164,203.80 in attorneys’ fees. The court will not 

make an award as to costs. Plaintiff is instructed to file a Cost Bill in accordance 

with Local Rule 54-292. 

DATED: March 15, 2006 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

 The Honorable Frank C. Damrell, Jr. 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:05-cv-00599-FCD-DAD Document 85 Filed 03/16/06 Page 3 of 3