Skip to main content
· 5/7/2024

Rickey Thompson v. Town of North Kingstown Zoning Board of Appeals

Syllabus

The plaintiff, Rickey Thompson, appealed from a Superior Court decision granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants, the Town of North Kingstown Zoning Board of Review (the town) and JAMM Golf LLC, Mark L. Hawkins, Joshua L. Hawkins, and M.L. Hawk Real Estate LLC (the developers) (collectively, defendants). The plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment that: (1) the town council was not authorized to enter into a consent judgment, as doing so usurped the planning commission's authority to review a major land development application (2) the town council was not authorized to enter into the consent judgment, as it purported to change the zoning ordinance without notice or a public hearing and (3) the planning commission should not have relied upon the terms of the consent judgment to review the developers' application for preliminary plan approval. The hearing justice found that the plaintiff's complaint \at the core\ sought to invalidate a valid, final judgment of the federal court. <br><br>On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the hearing justice erred in granting summary judgment because although third parties lack standing to challenge an agreement to which they are not a party, he could challenge it because the consent judgment usurped the legislative statutory scheme regulating the zoning and development of land. The plaintiff also challenged the planning commission's decision to rely on the consent judgment in granting certain approvals for the development. He further argued that the consent judgment illegally constrained the planning commission, and violated the Rhode Island Zoning Enabling Act and the Compact Village District zoning ordinance, which establishes the acceptable percentages of residential and nonresidential coverage for developments in that zone. The plaintiff also argued that the town and developers engaged in illegal contract zoning. <br><br>The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff's complaint was an improper collateral attack on a vali

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.