Legal Opinion
Arkules v. BD. OF ADJUST. OF PARADISE VALLEY
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided April 30, 1986No. 2 CA-CIV 5679PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LACAGNINA, Judge.
Sam DeMuro petitioned the Board of Adjustment of the Town of Paradise Valley for a variance from a building regulation which would require his house to blend with the mountain background and to be made from materials or colors which would not unduly reflect light. The Board granted the variance, and Bernard and Barbara Arkules filed a special action in the superi- or court seeking reversal of the Board’s decision for the following reasons: 1) the notice of the Board’s hearing on the variance was defective; 2) the Board was prohibited by its own rules and regulations…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Garibaldi v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Applestein v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1928
- Preston v. DenkinsArizona Supreme Court · 1963
- Noonan v. ZONING BD. OF BARRINGTONSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1960
- Carini v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Burns v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
- M & M Auto Storage Pool, Inc. v. Chemical Waste Management, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1990
- Dowling v. StapleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- Boyce v. City of ScottsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988
- Murphy v. Town of Chino ValleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.