Bontrager Auto Service, Inc. v. Iowa City Board of Adjustment

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that issues must first be presented to the agency in order to be preserved for appellate review
• stating the term “de novo” means “any relevant evidence may be introduced to attempt to prove illegality such as” the board’s “failure to comply with statutory requirements”
• stating “the court should not substitute its judgment for that of the board”
• interpreting the identically worded provisions of chapter 414 — regarding city zoning
• finding substantial compliance with the written-findings requirement as to property values when board members discussed property-value requirement at hearing, city planner told board it must consider the requirement, and several persons at the hearing spoke about the issue
• finding failure to mention a specific issue in the findings was not fatal as it concluded, they do not meet the definition of a “necessary mechanical appurtenance.” 27 was clear the board considered the general standards of the special exception and whether those standards were met

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).