Stone v. City of Wilton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding 42% reduction in value of property did not constitute a taking “in light of the council’s reasonable belief that the public welfare required a change in zoning”
• holding where city council was faced with a number of competing concerns in regard to the proper zoning, “courts refrain from reviewing the merits of [the council’s] decisions if at least a debatable question exists as to the reasonableness of [its] action”
• Land use restrictions may be upheld \even though the challenged regulations destroyed or adversely affected recognized real property interests or flatly prohibited the most beneficial use of the property.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).