Bucktail, LLC v. County Council

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “piecemeal rezoning” involved adjudicative fact-finding, which warranted a meaningful statement of the Council’s findings of fact
• holding that the agency’s findings were insufficient to permit judicial review
• explaining that an agency’s “[findings of fact must be meaningful and cannot simply repeat statutory criteria, broad conclusory statements, or boilerplate resolutions”
• noting that Maryland Rules 7–201 and 7–202 do “not grant a right of judicial review, and ... [are] inapplicable where judicial review is not authorized by statute”
• finding a zoning process to be adjudicative because the zoning process involved “applying the Zoning Ordinance standards to the particular facts of Bucktail’s property”
• allowing appeal of circuit court’s judicial review of county council’s decision to deny a zoning amendment ordinance as it substantially sought a common law writ of mandamus

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).