Claim of McCarney v. Crane Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding petitioner had vested right where town approved petitioner’s plan and petitioner installed various improvements on the land prior to amendments to applicable zoning ordinance
• applying vested rights doctrine where there had been substantial expenditures and portion of land had been irrevocably granted to town as park in reliance on earlier zoning ordinance
• same, where landowner had made substantial expenditures on land that was irrevocably granted to town in reliance on earlier ordinance
• “The doctrine of vested rights has generally been described as an application of the constitutionally based common-law rule protecting nonconforming uses.”
• to complete a use following the passage of a restrictive zoning amendment, the landowner must have “undertaken substantial construction and made substantial expenditures prior to the effective date of the amendment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).