Legal Opinion
Griswold v. City of Homer
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided October 25, 1996No. S-6532PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EASTAUGH, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
In 1992 the Homer City Council adopted Ordinance 92-18 amending Homer’s zoning and planning code to allow motor vehicle sales and services on thirteen lots in Homer’s Central Business District. Frank Griswold claims Ordinance 92-18 is invalid because it constitutes spot zoning. We affirm the superior court’s rejection of that claim. Griswold also claims the Ordinance is invalid because a council member with a personal interest improperly participated in its adoption. We hold that the council member should not have participated. We consequently remand so the…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Buell v. City of BremertonWashington Supreme Court · 1972
- Concerned Citizens of South Kenai Peninsula v. Kenai Peninsula BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
- Gruber v. Mayor and Tp. Committee of Raritan Tp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1962
- Falcon v. Alaska Public Offices CommissionAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
- Gates v. City of Tenakee SpringsAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Tree of Life Christian Sch. v. City of Upper Arlington, OhioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
- Evans Ex Rel. Kutch v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
- Balough v. Fairbanks North Star BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- Alaska Conservation Foundation v. Pebble Limited PartnershipAlaska Supreme Court · 2015
- Floyd v. BOARD OF COM'RS BONNEVILLE COUNTYIdaho Supreme Court · 2002
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.