Legal Opinion
Ragucci v. Metropolitan Development Commission
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided December 2, 1998No. 49S02-9805-CV-299PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON PETITION TO TRANSFER
BOEHM, Justice.
We granted transfer to consider the legal standards for evaluating changes in a legally established nonconforming use under a zoning ordinance. We hold that the interpretation of ordinances that restrict the expansion of nonconforming uses turns in the first instance on the specific language of the relevant ordinance, giving its words their plain, ordinary, and usual meaning. Each municipality is, subject to constitutional limitations, free to enact an ordinance that limits the expansion of nonconforming uses in the manner and to the degree that it deems…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Siwinski v. Town of Ogden DunesIndiana Supreme Court · 2011
- Hochstedler v. St. Joseph County Solid Waste Management DistrictIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
- New Albany Historic Preservation Commission v. Bradford Realty, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012
- Steuben County v. Family Development, Ltd.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2001
- Board of Com'rs of LaPorte County v. Town & Country UtilitiesIndiana Court of Appeals · 2003
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.