Legal Opinion

Rivera v. City of Phoenix

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 14, 1996No. 1 CA-CV 95-0217PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KLEINSCHMIDT, Judge.

Daniel Rivera appeals from the denial of his request for a residential zoning variance. We affirm the denial because we find that Rivera did not have a vested right in the change to his home, that his request for a variance was properly denied, and that the City of Phoenix is not estopped from enforcing its zoning code.

Rivera’s residence is located in an area where the zoning code limits the square footage of improvements to twenty-five percent of the area of the lot. In 1993, Rivera ap plied for a building permit to construct an addition to his residence. The…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. United States v. Ruby Company, a Utah CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
  2. Pollard v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  3. Freightways, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Misuk v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
  5. Town of Paradise Valley v. Gulf Leisure Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1976

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Valencia Energy Co. v. Arizona Department of RevenueArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Lowe v. Pima CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
  3. Pawn 1st LLC v. City of Phoenix/jachimekArizona Supreme Court · 2017
  4. Pawn 1st, LLC v. City of PhoenixCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
  5. Lowe v. Pima CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API