Cole v. BOARD OF ADJ. OF CITY OF HURON
South Dakota Supreme Court
1DissentSabers, Justice
[¶ 21.] 1. THE CIRCUIT COURT APPLIED THE PROPER STANDARD OF REVIEW IN DETERMINING THAT THE BOARD’S GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WAS ILLEGAL.
[¶ 22.] I disagree with the majority opinion’s determination that the circuit court reviewed the Board’s record de novo, “thereby substituting its discretion for that of the Board.”
[¶ 23.] As we stated in the prior appeal, “the only question presented on certiorari is whether the lower tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction.” Cole v. Bd. of Adj., City of Huron, 1999 SD 54, ¶ 10, 592 N.W.2d 175, 176 (citations omitted). Thus, the circuit court’s review is “confined…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Deardorf v. Board of Adjustment of Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1962
- McClure AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Greenawalt v. Zoning Bd. of Adj. of DavenportSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
- Zimmerman v. O'MearaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
- Hamerly v. City of Lennox Bd. of Adj.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.