Court Opinion

ID: 9915849
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-08 20:01:44.923461+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:20:46.686073
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-13262   Document: 50-1    Date Filed: 01/08/2024   Page: 1 of 4

                                                [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                 In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                         ____________________

                              No. 22-13262
                         ____________________

       TOKYO GWINNETT, LLC,
       d.b.a. Tokyo Valentino,
                                          Plaintiﬀ-Counter Defendant
                                                           Appellant,
       MICHAEL S. MORRISON,
       F.E.G. HOLDINGS, LLC,
       ALFRED JAY NAULT,
       MATTHEW TRIPP,
                                  Third Party Defendants-Appellants,
       versus
       GWINNETT COUNTY, GEORGIA,
USCA11 Case: 22-13262     Document: 50-1      Date Filed: 01/08/2024    Page: 2 of 4

       2                      Opinion of the Court                22-13262

                                           Defendant-Third Party Plaintiﬀ
                                             Counter Claimant-Appellee,

       KATHY HOLLAND, et al.,
       individually,

                                                               Defendants.

                            ____________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Northern District of Georgia
                     D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cv-02606-TWT
                           ____________________

       Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, ROSENBAUM, and ABUDU, Cir-
       cuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               Appellants moved to dismiss as moot their appeal before this
       Court. Tokyo Gwinnett and Gwinnett County have been engaged
       in litigation since 2015 over Tokyo Gwinnett’s ability to sell sexual
       devices at its leased storefront. The County has since updated its
       applicable regulations, but Tokyo Gwinnett had argued that its sale
       of sexual devices was “grandfathered in” under the older regula-
       tions, or the older regulations were unconstitutional and its sales
       were lawful prior nonconforming use. The County countersued,
USCA11 Case: 22-13262     Document: 50-1      Date Filed: 01/08/2024    Page: 3 of 4

       22-13262               Opinion of the Court                        3

       seeking an injunction preventing Tokyo Gwinnett from operating
       at its leased property. Tokyo Gwinnett originally appealed two of
       the district court’s orders: one granting summary judgment to the
       County on all Tokyo Gwinnett’s claims, and another granting the
       County’s requested permanent injunction.
               In its Third Amended Complaint, Tokyo Gwinnett asked for
       two forms of relief: a declaration of its rights under the old ordi-
       nance and an injunction preventing the County from interfering
       with its business under the new ordinance moving forward. So
       Tokyo Gwinnett’s requested relief and the County’s injunction
       rested on two circumstances: Tokyo Gwinnett’s ability to con-
       tinue selling sexual devices at its specific leased property, and its
       ability to continue operating in Gwinnett County in general.
              Neither circumstance can be satisfied any longer. Since fil-
       ing their appeal, Tokyo Gwinnett, LLC, closed its business, lost its
       lease, and was denied a business license to operate in Gwinnett
       County. Because of these intervening events, Tokyo Gwinnett no
       longer has a vested property right in the leased storefront that a
       court can protect, nor does it have a business (or a license) with
       which a court could bar the County from interfering. And the
       County’s permanent injunction was tied to that same lease that has
       now ended and the business previously conducted at a now-vacant
       property. Therefore, this case has been rendered moot. Tokyo
       Gwinnett has also voluntarily dismissed a related state-court action
       made moot by time and the closure of Tokyo Gwinnett’s business.
USCA11 Case: 22-13262     Document: 50-1     Date Filed: 01/08/2024   Page: 4 of 4

       4                     Opinion of the Court                22-13262

              Accordingly, Appellant’s motion to dismiss this appeal is
       GRANTED. As is our practice when an appeal is rendered moot,
       the district court’s order for summary judgment, order for a per-
       manent injunction, and final judgment, which were the subject of
       this appeal, are VACATED. Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, 144 S. Ct.
       18, 22 (2023). This case is REMANDED to the district court with
       instructions to dismiss this case as moot. Dow Jones & Co. v. Kaye,
       256 F.3d 1251, 1258 (11th Cir. 2001).