<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Community Defense Counsel &#187; ZZ: Borough of Sayreville v. 35 Club</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/tag/zz-borough-of-sayreville-v-35-club/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress</link>
	<description>Protecting Children and Their Neighborhoods</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 17:30:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>N.J. Supreme Court: Towns can reject sexually oriented businesses, citing locations in other states</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/20/n-j-supreme-court-towns-can-reject-sexually-oriented-businesses-citing-locations-in-other-states/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/20/n-j-supreme-court-towns-can-reject-sexually-oriented-businesses-citing-locations-in-other-states/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Alternative Sites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Borough of Sayreville v. 35 Club]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2663</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HELD:  In evaluating the adequacy of alternative channels of communication when deciding an as-applied  constitutional challenge to the State’s statute limiting the places where sexually-oriented businesses may operate, trial courts are not precluded from considering the existence of sites that are located outside of New Jersey but that are found within the relevant market area as defined by the parties’ experts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/20/n-j-supreme-court-towns-can-reject-sexually-oriented-businesses-citing-locations-in-other-states/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

