Legal Opinion

City of Glendale v. Aldabbagh

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1997No. CV-96-0342-PRPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MARTONE, Justice.

We are asked to decide whether the right to use a preexisting nonconforming use can be lost through nonuse, short of an intent to abandon. We hold that an intent to abandon is not required and that a preexisting nonconforming use can be lost where its nonuse is attributable, at least in part, to the property owner.

I. Background

Amer “Omar” Aldabbagh owns an adult entertainment business in Glendale that would violate Glendale’s zoning ordinance but for its status as a preexisting nonconforming use. The county attorney filed a nuisance abatement action against Aldabbagh…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Pappas v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  2. Texas National Theatres, Inc. v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Board of Zoning Adjustment v. BoykinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1957
  4. Hartley v. City of Colorado SpringsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  5. Ernst v. Johnson CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1994

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State, Dept. of Admin. v. SchallockArizona Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Southwest Soil Remediation, Inc. v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
  3. Whiteco Outdoor Advertising v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  4. Arizona Department of Revenue v. Great Western Publishing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  5. Rodehorst Bros. v. City of Norfolk Bd. of AdjustmentNebraska Supreme Court · 2014

3 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