Case Name: TAXPAYERS FOR VINCENT, an unincorporated political association, and Candidates' Outdoor Graphics Service (COGS) a California corporation, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. MEMBERS OF the CITY COUNCIL OF the CITY OF LOS ANGELES; and Edward D. Longley as Director of the Bureau of Street Maintenance for the City of Los Angeles, Defendants/Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1984-07-20
Citations: 738 F.2d 353
Docket Number: No. 80-5686
Parties: TAXPAYERS FOR VINCENT, an unincorporated political association, and Candidates’ Outdoor Graphics Service (COGS) a California corporation, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. MEMBERS OF the CITY COUNCIL OF the CITY OF LOS ANGELES; and Edward D. Longley as Director of the Bureau of Street Maintenance for the City of Los Angeles, Defendants/Appellees.
Judges: Before NELSON and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges and EAST, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 738
Pages: 353–353

Head Matter:
TAXPAYERS FOR VINCENT, an unincorporated political association, and Candidates’ Outdoor Graphics Service (COGS) a California corporation, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. MEMBERS OF the CITY COUNCIL OF the CITY OF LOS ANGELES; and Edward D. Longley as Director of the Bureau of Street Maintenance for the City of Los Angeles, Defendants/Appellees.
No. 80-5686.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
July 20, 1984.
Wayne S. Canterbury, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs/appellants.
Anthony S. Alperin, Deputy City Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for defendants/appellees.
Before NELSON and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges and EAST, District Judge.
The Honorable William G. East, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
On May 15, 1984, the Supreme Court reversed our judgment (682 F.2d 847) see Members of the City Council of the City of Los Angeles et al. v. Taxpayers for Vincent et al., — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 2118, 80 L.Ed.2d 772 (1984), and remanded the case to us. We therefore remand to the district court for action consistent with the Supreme Court opinion.