Legal Opinion

Bocek Bros. v. Anchorage

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1988No. S-1740, S-1773PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COMPTON, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

This case arises from condemnation proceedings initiated by Anchorage against property owned by Bocek Brothers (Bocek), a partnership. The property consists of a single lot, two-thirds of which is zoned for high density residential usage, R-2, and one-third of which is zoned for light industrial usage, I-l. 1 This condition is normal ly referred to as split-zoning. 2 R. Anderson, American Law of Zoning 3d § 9.12 (1986). Bocek does not contest the zoning. Rather, at issue is whether the R-2 portion of the lot' may be used to provide off-street parking and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Bow & Arrow Manor, Inc. v. Town of West OrangeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
  2. Consolidated Management, Inc. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Stewart & Grindle, Inc. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Hertz v. BerzanskeAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Borkowski v. SnowdenAlaska Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Commercial Union Ins.Washington Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Commercial Union InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. South Anchorage Concerned Coalition, Inc. v. CoffeyAlaska Supreme Court · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API