Legal Opinion

Anne Arundel County v. Harwood Civic Ass'n

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 21, 2015No. 39/14PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHarrell, J.

In Anne Arundel County, Maryland v. Steve Bell, 442 Md. 539, 113 A.3d 639, 2015 WL 1798953 (2015), filed immediately prior to the opinion in the present case, we concluded that the doctrine of property owner standing is not the *598appropriate test for a judicial challenge to a comprehensive zoning action. See id., at 546-47, 113 A.3d 639. Rather, plaintiffs wishing to challenge in Maryland courts the legislative process and final action adopting a comprehensive zoning are required to demonstrate taxpayer standing — the standing doctrine applicable to judicial challenges to legislative actions.…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Klauenberg v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  2. Mayor and Council of Rockville v. Rylyns Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Bryniarski v. Montgomery County Board of AppealsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
  4. Cassel v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1950
  5. State Center, LLC v. Lexington Charles Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Motor Vehicle Administration v. GonceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2016
  2. Floyd v. Mayor and City Council of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API