PART XIX. CONTROL OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING
AND JUNKYARDS
§461. Declaration of policy
The Legislature finds and declares that outdoor advertising and maintenance of junkyards are legitimate commercial uses of private property and, for the purpose of promoting the public safety, health, welfare, convenience and enjoyment of public travel, to protect the public investment in public highways, and to preserve and enhance the scenic beauty of lands bordering public highways, it is hereby declared to be in the public interest to regulate and restrict the erection and maintenance of outdoor advertising and the establishment, operation and maintenance of junkyards in areas adjacent to the Interstate and Primary Highway Systems within this State.
Added by Acts 1966, No. 474, §1.
Notes of Decisions
STATE ETC. v. Nat'l Advert. Co., 356 So. 2d 557 (La. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 14× “The State of Louisiana, through the Department of Highways instituted this suit against National Advertising Company pursuant to LSA-R.S. 48:461 et seq., entitled "Control of Outdoor Advertising and Junkyards," to compel the removal of numerous outdoor advertising signs owned by…”
State, Dept. of Hwys. v. Lamar Adv. Co. of La., Inc., 304 So. 2d 779 (La. Ct. App. 1974).
· cites it 2× “Under Act 474 of 1966, entitled "Control Of Outdoor Advertising And Junkyards", LSA-R.S. 48:461 et seq., the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Highways, filed this suit against Lamar Advertising Company of Louisiana, Inc.”
Hiway Ads, Inc. v. STATE ETC., 356 So. 2d 501 (La. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 3× “*503 Three issues are presented for our determination: (1) what is the effective date of Act 474 of 1966 (presently R.S. 48:461, et seq.)? (2) what is the meaning of R.”
Inn of Hammond, Inc. v. State, Dep't of Transp. & Dev., 376 So. 2d 1318 (La. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 2× “R.S. 48:461 et seq. — the state version of federal highway beautification legislation — DOTD seeks to compel removal of a number of advertising signs leased by the plaintiffs.”
State ex rel. Dep't of Highways v. Lamar Advert. Co., 271 So. 2d 49 (La. Ct. App. 1972).
“R.S. 48:461 et seq. (Act 474 of 1966). Our review of the record reflects that the owners of the land on which the signs have been erected are not named as parties defendant or otherwise in the subject proceedings.”
Mollere v. State, Dep't of Transp. & Dev., Off. of Highways, 480 So. 2d 491 (La. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 4× “the sign in question was erected in 1972 some four years prior to *493 the passage of Act 474 of 1976 [which now appears as LSA-R.S. 48:461 et seq.], which ... [was] to be the cut-off date for the erection of otherwise illegal advertising.”
State ex rel. Dep't of Highways v. Dance, 367 So. 2d 155 (La. Ct. App. 1979).
“It does not appear, as argued by defendants, that use of this property in an industrial area for advertising purposes would be prohibited by LSA-R.S. 48:461 et seq. It is only reasonable that the remaining property, of very small size, irregularly shaped, with reduced road…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.