Tim Thompson, Inc. v. Village of Hinsdale

How courts have described this case

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

• “where the nonmoving party is under no obligation to prove its case, it logically follows that the standard of proof cannot be operative”
• “where the nonmoving party is under no obligation to prove its case, it logically follows that the standard of proof cannot be operative”
• claim properly dismissed where the plaintiff failed to allege any substantial deprivation of an economically viable use, in that the plaintiff “remained free to develop the entire parcel subject only to the newly enacted ordinance”
• “[W]e choose to view [the plaintiffs] property not as three distinct segments, as [the plaintiff] would have us do[,]” but instead viewing the lots as one parcel, “which is supported by the well-pleaded fact[s] in [the plaintiffs] complaint[.]”
• claim properly dismissed where the plaintiff failed to allege any substantial deprivation of an economically viable use, in that the plaintiff “remained free to develop the entire parcel subject only to the newly enacted ordinance”
• wherein that court disagreed with this court’s analysis in Suhadolnik

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).