Challenging a Dev Order Flashcards

1
Q

Summary of legis standard of review.

A
LEGIS
-----------
LAC debatable relationship
------------------------
Legis
Arb + Capricious
fairly Debatable + rational Relationship to pub purp
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Legislative Challenge in Circuit.
Prima Facie case

A

Arbitrary & capricious

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Legislative Challenge in Circuit.
How does LG win?

A
LEGIS/Q-J CP
-----------
1.  PL fails its prima facie (arbitrary + capricious)
OR
2.  Fairly debatable +
3.  Rational relatnshp to pub purp.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the “special injury” test for 3rd parties to have standing for a writ?

A

Show special damages peculiar to the party which differ in kind (as opposed to degree) to the damages suffered by the community as a whole. &raquo_space;Look for environ grp w/ specific injury not citizen w/ gen worries.«
PLUS
Special interest group must show that a substantial # of mbrs are similarly affected.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Can a 3rd party challenge a development order decision?

A

Yes, interested persons + special interest groups may pursue a writ BUT they must have a “special injury.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What 3 things does the Trial Court look for on review?

A

Q on J(ames bond) was a Pro, Correct & Competent.
————————
1. wh/ pro due process afforded
2. wh/ correct law (Code) applied
3. wh/ act supported by comp subst evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What 2 things does the Appellate Court look for in its reviewing writ?

A
Q-J Code
-----------
The Appellate Court is very PC [Pro, Correct].
------------------------
1.  wh/ pro due process afforded
2.  wh/ correct law (Code) applied
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Exs of Comp Subst. Evid.

A
Q-J Code
-----------
Examples:
1.  Expert.
2. Professional staff.
3. Fact based (non-technical) testimony of neighbor and lay people if has 1st hand knowledge (road there for 20 yrs).
4. Note - attorney testimony is not.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are appeal avenues for a Legis. decision?

A

De novo Dec action in Circuit
Arbitrary & capricious vs. Fairly debatable & Public Purp.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are appeal avenues for a Q-J decision based on Land Dev. Code compliance?

A

Writ of cert.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are appeal avenues for a Legis decision based on consistency or inconsistency w/ CP?

A
LEGIS
-----------
EXCLUSIVE = dec action for equitable relief + in Circuit but follow Appellate procedure.
OR
Local Process.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What are appeal avenues for a Q-J decision based on BOTH Code compliance + consistency or inconsistency w/ CP?

A

File both a writ of cert (Code compliance) + a dec action (CP).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What are appeal avenues for a QJ or Legis decision based on constitutionality?

A

A separate action running independently of any writ/dec.
Can try 42 USC 1988 (attorney’s fees for breach of civil rights via 42 USC 1983.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is a non-traditional cheap avenue to appeal a Q-J decision?

A

FLUEDRA (special magistrate). Must exhaust all administrative appeals.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

If decision based on CP & the aggrieved party is filing its exclusive method of declaratory action:
(a) What will the Court broadly construe?
(b) What will the court strictly construe?

A

LEGIS/Q-J CP

(a) Broadly define “aggrieved party” to include developer/applicant.
(b) Review to see if development order strictly complies w/ CP

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What happens if State + DOAH determine proposed CP Amendment is not compliant w/ 163. Can a citizen oppose?

A

No.
If Amendment unsuccessful before DOAH, citizen’s avenue is to wait until he has an action of the LG to appeal for lack of compliance w/ CP = dec action under §163.3215.

17
Q

What “person” has standing to appeal SPA’s finding that a CP amendment is compliant?

A

“Affected” person [163.3184(1)(a)]
LG, property owners, residents or business operators w/i LG boundaries, or abutting the FLUM, or adjoining LGs w/ substantial impacts.

18
Q

What “party” has standing to enforce the CP by filing a dec action to appeal development order decision based on inconsistency w/ CP?

A

“Aggrieved or adversely affected party” [163.3215(2)].
(a) Person or LG that will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by CP.
(b) Who submitted comments after the Transmittal Hearing.
~~
Aggrieved & Adversely Affected = CP (dec + local)
Unfairly burdened by perm FIB - VIC, mafioso Harris.
Unfairly burdened by Dev Ord - FLUEDRA

19
Q

What is an “affected” person w/ standing to appeal SPA’s finding CP amendment is compliant?

A

LG, property owners, residents or business operators w/i LG boundaries, or abutting the FLUM, or adjoining LGs w/ substantial impacts.

20
Q

Define “aggrieved or adversely affected party” w/ standing to enforce CP by filing a dec action to appeal development order decision based on inconsistency w/ CP?

A

Person or local government that will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by CP.

21
Q

Who has standing to file Bert Harris?

A
LEGIS/Q-J
-----------
Bert ("VIC") Harris is Burdened Permanently by a Direct FIB.
------------------------
1.   Permanent restriction.
2.  Direct restriction.
3.  Foreseeable use. 
4.  o unable to attain Investment Backed expectation
22
Q

For which claims do you file dec action?

A
APPEAL
-----------
Legis LAC rational relationship
Arb + Capr vs. Fairly Debatable + Related to Pub Purp
------------------------
de novo.  PL shows consistent, Def shows 
(a)  Inconsistent or 
(b)  Consistent but related to pub purp.
23
Q

In what scenario does a person have standing to challenge any LG decision without a special injury?

A

When alleging the LG act violates constitutional limitations on LG’s taxing and spending powers.
Epps v. Halifax