Unalienable Rights Foundation

PRESENT: All the Justices

BRADLEY S. TANNER, ET AL.

v. Record No. 080998 OPINION BY

JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN

April 17, 2009

CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH

A. Joseph Canada, Jr., Judge

In this appeal, we consider whether the circuit court erred in rejecting a constitutional challenge to a municipal noise control ordinance.

Bradley S. Tanner and Eric A. Williams (collectively, the owners) own and operate BAE Ventures, Inc., t/a The Peppermint Beach Club (the club), a licensed restaurant and entertainment venue located in the 1800 block of Atlantic Avenue in the City of Virginia Beach (City). The club is located in a part of the City commonly referred to as the "oceanfront," which includes restaurants, bars, hotels, and outdoor entertainment venues.

The club, which is on the ground floor of the Howard Johnson Hotel, hosts disc jockeys and occasional "live" entertainment groups that play various types of music including "hip-hop," "punk rock," "emo," and "indie" music. The owners repeatedly have been warned by City police officers about music sound levels, and have received citations for violations of

Virginia Beach City Code � 23-47 (the ordinance). The ordinance states:

It shall be unlawful for any person to create, or allow to be created any unreasonably loud, disturbing and unnecessary noise in the city or any noise of such character, intensity and duration as to be detrimental to the life or health of persons of reasonable sensitivity or to disturb or annoy the quiet, comfort or repose of reasonable persons. The following acts, among others, are declared to be loud, disturbing and unnecessary noise in violation of this section, but such enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive:

(1) The playing of any television set, radio, tape player, phonograph or any musical instrument in such a manner or with such volume as to annoy or disturb the quiet, comfort or repose of reasonable persons.

(2) The keeping of any animal which, by causing frequent or long-continued noise, shall disturb the quiet, comfort or repose of the neighborhood to such an extent as to constitute a nuisance.

VA Beach's Judge West's Opinion

The Virginia Supreme Court Friday morning, in a unanimous ruling, declared Virginia's Republican Party's� notorious 'transportation' plan unconstitutional.

The ruling immediately quashes plans both here and in nothern Virginia by the rogue, un-elected agencies to implement planned new taxes and fees this April 1st.

The Court all but finished off the authorities created by the rouge republican�� General Assembly members who were trying to charge the public for roads who's main purpose was to serve as feeders to want-to-be tourist attractions, rather than having the tourist industry itself paying for these projects via higher taxes on services provided to the tourist.

This holding by the Court may also force the General Assembly to revisit impact fees charged to developers. The General assembly turned this down earlier this year.

Local citizen previous efforts, including a case heard by Virginia Beach's Circuit Court [Judge West], to kill the plan failed and as a consequence to these failures this joint action was filed challenging the constitutionality of the legislation.

Robert Dean, Secretary of� Virginia Beach's Unalienable Rights Foundation , who was one of the plaintiffs in the suit said, "In a unanimous decision this morning, the unelected regional transportation authorities were ruled illegal and unconstitutional by the Virginia Supreme Court.

"The taxpayers of Virginia owe their financial freedom to Patrick McSweeney, the attorney representing the plaintiffs in the Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads suits.

"Call your local city council and board of supervisors and share the news with those members who supported the illegal and unconstitutional authority."

What is a UARF Fellow�

�

The 1874 Sharp Buffalo Riffle

There is Much argument in Virginia about what is a Public Record

We Find that Issue raised by government in�

Most Virginia Freedom of Information Requests.

What is a Public Record in Virginia ?

Virginia has gone to great Lengths to define it is it Code of Laws.

The simplest answer is found in a�

1874 Virginia Supreme Court Decision.

In 1874, the Virginia Supreme Court defined a public record as a written memorial, intended to serve as evidence of something written, said or done, made by a public officer authorized to make it. Coleman v. Commonwealth, 66 Va. (25 Gratt.) 865, 881-82 (1874).

UARF's Robert Dean Prevails

VA Beach's Judge West's Opinion

301 Moved Permanently

What is a UARF Fellow�

�

The 1874 Sharp Buffalo Riffle

There is Much argument in Virginia about what is a Public Record

We Find that Issue raised by government in�

Most Virginia Freedom of Information Requests.

What is a Public Record in Virginia ?

Virginia has gone to great Lengths to define it is it Code of Laws.

The simplest answer is found in a�

1874 Virginia Supreme Court Decision. In 1874, the Virginia Supreme Court defined a public record as a written memorial, intended to serve as evidence of something written, said or done, made by a public officer authorized to make it. Coleman v. Commonwealth, 66 Va. (25 Gratt.) 865, 881-82 (1874).

UARF's Robert Dean Prevails

VA Beach's Judge West's Opinion

301 Moved Permanently

1874 Virginia Supreme Court Decision.

In 1874, the Virginia Supreme Court defined a public record as a written memorial, intended to serve as evidence of something written, said or done, made by a public officer authorized to make it. Coleman v. Commonwealth, 66 Va. (25 Gratt.) 865, 881-82 (1874).