In Re Appeal of Taft Corners Associates, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that applicant who obtained subdivision permit before adverse regulatory change had no vested right in separate zoning permit which applicant sought after regulatory change
• concluding that zoning permit application did not vest right in zoning regulation enacted after landowner applied for subdivision permit but before he applied for zoning permit
• holding that “the balance of competing policy interests [militate] against giving holders of subdivision permits vested rights to zoning permits under the zoning ordinance applicable when the subdivision permit was sought or obtained”
• holding that a subsequent zoning permit application did not vest at the time the applicant submitted a prior subdivision application; instead, the applicant’s rights vested for each application separately at the time that each was individually submitted
• holding that a subdivision application created vested rights for the subdivision regulations but created no vested rights to have a separate zoning permit application, filed 10 years later, considered under the zoning regulations in effect at the time of the subdivision application
• refusing to allow the filing of a subdivision permit application to vest the right of consideration under prior laws for a subsequent zoning permit application

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).