C. R. Investments, Inc. v. Village of Shoreview

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “the village acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying [a] special use permit for reasons which either had no factual bases or were not legally sufficient”
• concluding that \the village acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying [a] special use permit for reasons which either had no factual bases or were not legally sufficient\
• concluding that “the vague reservations expressed by” members of the public did not provide factual support for denying the application
• holding that provision in comprehensive plan requiring developer to demonstrate that proposed use “is consistent with the [comprehensive] plan’s general intent and purpose” was unreasonably vague, subjective, and did not furnish ground for denial of special-use permit
• stating that neighbors’ objections to con ditional use permit application must be based on more than conjecture or speculation
• indicating that when there was a plan for alleviating parking and traffic concerns, those concerns were not a proper basis for denial of a CUP

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).