Laserfiche WebLink
2009 bills <br />the state. Instead the state's limited regulatory scheme is one of authorizes tattooing, subject <br />to various restrictions. A complete ban on tattooing, however, is thus in conflict with state law. <br />Virginia courts have reached virtually identical conclusions under that state's law. Blue <br />Horseshoe Tattoo; V, Ltd'. V. City Norfolk, 72 Va. Cir. 388 (Cir. Ct. 2007); Ancient Art Tattoo <br />Studio v. City of Chesapeake, 56 Va. Cir 210, 210 (2001) (holding that Virginia Code § 15.2- <br />912 allows for the regulation, not the banning of tattoo studios and remarking that "(h)ad the <br />legislature intended to allow localities to prohibit the existence of tattoo studios, the legislature <br />would have stated such. "). See Lamar OCI South Corp v Staniy County-Board of Adjustment <br />[81, 186 N.C. App. 44, 650 S.E.2d 37 (2007), aff'd, 362 N.C.670 (2008) (zoning regulation that <br />would not allow the relocation of a nonconforming outdoor advertising sign to a particular site <br />invalid where state regulation would expressly allow it). <br />So, our friend ought to be able to find a North Carolina community where he can get a tattoo of <br />his girlfriend Marlene. Now all he has to worry about is what happens later when he gets <br />hitched and starts a family with Rita instead. <br />Article printed from Coates' Canons: NC Local Government Law Blog: <br />http: / /sogweb .sog.unc.edu /blogs /localgovt <br />URL to article: http: // sogweb. sog. unc.edu /blogs /localgovt / ?p = 3233 <br />URLs in this post: <br />[1] Image: http: // sogweb. sog.unc.edu /blogs /localgovt /wp content /uploads / 2010 / 09 <br />/Dragon- Tattoo- 33.jpg <br />[2] federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals : http: / /www.ca9.uscourts.gov /datastore /opinions/ <br />2010/09/09/08- 56914.pdf. <br />[3] Image: http: // sogweb. sog. unc .edu /blogs /localgovt /wp content /uploads / 2010 / 09 <br />/Dragon- Tattoo -2.bmp <br />[4] Image: http: // sogweb. sog. unc .edu /blogs /localgovt /wp content /uploads / 2010 / 09 <br />/Girl - tattoo.jpg <br />[5] G.S. 160A -174: <br />http: / /www.ncleg.net/ Enacted Legislation /Statutes/ HTML/ BySection /Chapter_160 <br />A /GS_160A- 174.html <br />[6] G.S. 130A -283: <br />http: / /www.ncleg.net /Enacted Legislation /Statutes/ HTM L/ BySection /Chapter_130 <br />A /GS_130A- 283.htmi <br />[7] G.S.'14 -400 : <br />http: / /www.ncleg.net/ Enacted Legislation /Statutes /HTML/ BySection /Chapter_14 /GS_ <br />14- 400.html <br />[8] Lamar OCI South Corp. v. Staniy County Board of Adjustment: <br />http: / /www.aoc.state.nc.us /www /public /coa /opin ions/ 2007 /060993- 1.htm. <br />Copyright © 2010 School of Government at the University of North Carolina. All rights reserved. <br />Page 332 <br />http: // sogweb. sog. unc. edu lblogs /localgovt/ ?p= 3233&�rint =l 12/6/2010 <br />