Legal Opinion

Griswold v. City of Homer

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided September 20, 2002No. S-10321PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FABE, Chief Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

Frank Griswold appeals the Homer Planning Commission's approval of nonconforming uses on a lot bordering his own. He alleges that there was insufficient evidence to support the Commission's decision and also makes several claims of procedural error. Because we conclude that there is substantial evidence to support the Commission's decision to approve the nonconforming uses, and Griswold's claims of procedural error have no merit, we affirm the superior court's decision.

H. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

A. Factual History

Robert L. Stewart, president of COB,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Miller v. ITT Arctic ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 1978
  2. DeYonge v. Nana/MarriottAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Griswold v. City of HomerAlaska Supreme Court · 1996
  4. South Anchorage Concerned Coalition, Inc. v. CoffeyAlaska Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Galt v. StantonAlaska Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Griswold v. City of HomerAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Luper v. City of WasillaAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Pruitt v. City of SewardAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Tweedy v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough Board of Adjustment and AppealsAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Griswold v. Homer Bd. of AdjustmentAlaska Supreme Court · 2019

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

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

Powered by the Exa API