determining that because the zoning ordinance at issue in Ready Mix “create[d] an exception to allow an otherwise invalid use of land,” “any ambiguity regarding the statute’s applicability” would actually “be construed against the owner of the land”
How later courts described this case
- determining that because the zoning ordinance at issue in Ready Mix “create[d] an exception to allow an otherwise invalid use of land,” “any ambiguity regarding the statute’s applicability” would actually “be construed against the owner of the land”
- determining that because the statute at issue in Ready Mix “create[d] an exception to allow an otherwise invalid use of land,” “any ambiguity regarding the statute’s applicability” would actually “be construed against the owner of the land”
- finding a declaratory judgment action was appropriate despite the availability of a writ of certiorari because “[t]he complaint required an assessment of whether the Company, by its actions prior to the passage of the zoning ordinance, invoked the protections of Tennessee Code Annotated section 13-7-208 and qualified as a direct challenge to ‘the applicability of th[e] ordinance’ to the property”
- finding a party was not required to exhaust its administrative remedies where the key issue for review was whether the landowner “by its actions prior to the passage of the zoning ordinance, invoked the protections of [the Grandfather Clause]” and thus presented a question of law.
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., J.,
concurring.
I concur with the Court’s conclusion that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court’s finding that Ready Mix, USA, LLC’s activities on its property established pre-existing use and, therefore, qualify for protection under Tenn. Code Ann. § 13-7-208 (2011). I base my decision entirely on our prior precedents construing Tenn.Code Ann. § 13-7-208 without any consideration, directly or indirectly, of the diminishing assets doctrine.