2006

Metro v Buchanon (Tenn Court of Appeals, January , 2006)

City of Knoxville v Entertainment Resources (Tenn Supreme Court, June , 2006)
Concurring Opinion

Short v City of Brentwood (Tenn Court of Appeals, June , 2006)

Harding Academy v Metro BZA (Tenn Court of Appeals, May 2006)

Covey v City of East Ridge (Tenn Court of Appeals, April 2006)

Harding Academy v Metro Bldg Code Bd (Tenn Court of Appeals March 14, 2006)
Holding: School entitled to demo permits notwithstanding pending legislation doctrine.
Affirms trial court opinion Harding Academy v Metro Bldg Code Bd

Cleveland v Mike Wade (Tenn Court of Appeals, February , 2006)

Moore v MBZA (Tenn Court of Appeals, February 3, 2006)
Holding: MBZA approval of mixed use development on non-conforming property upheld.

2005

Edwards v Allen (Tenn Court of Appeals, November 28, 2005)
Holding: Ordinance passed with improper notice is void ab initio.

Alexander Ford-Mercury v City of Franklin

Cornersville v Harmon (Tenn Court of Appeals, February 1, 2005)
Holding: Enforcement action against business which refused to comply with
local zoning regulations.

Moore & Associates v Lon F. West (Tenn Court of Appeals, January 26, 2005)
Holding: Declaratory judgment not available to challenge interpretation of
zoning provision. Appeal via common law writ of certiorari is only avenue of appeal.

Lamar Tennessee v City of Hendersonville (Tenn Court of Appeals, January , 2005)

2004

Custom Land v Coopertown (Tenn Court of Appeals, December 22, 2004)
Holding: Operation of landfill had not begun such that it was protected by
TCA § 13-7-208. Affirms trial court opinion Custom Land v. Coopertown (trial court).

DE Ryan v Metro Board of Zoning Appeals (Tenn Court of Appeals, August 31, 2004)
Holding: BZA may not reconsider case outside 60 days of original decision unless
party intentionally misrepresents the case; no misrepresentation here. However, no
protection by TCA § 13-7-208 because use did not exist at time of zoning change.

Rutherford v Murray (Tenn Court of Appeals, August 20, 2004)
Holding: Non-conforming property had sufficiently begun use to claim protection of TCA § 13-7-208.

Harding Academy v Metro Bldg Code Bd (Davidson County Chancery Court, July 29, 2004)
Holding: School entitled to demo permits notwithstanding pending legislation doctrine.

Ballantyne v Champion Builders (Texas Supreme Court, July 9, 2004)
Holding: Members of zoning board entitled to immunity from tort even given
offensive comments made concerning proposed development.
Concurring opinion is here.

Bookout v. Knox County BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 21, 2004)
Holding: Decision of BZA concerning density in PUD upheld.

Levy v. Franks (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 9, 2004)
Holding: This tort case arises out of a land use controversy between two neighbors.
The damages awarded for malicious prosecution are affirmed and case remanded for
punitive damages.

Blankenship dba Skullbone Music Park v. Gibson County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, June 10, 2004)
Holding: Denial of zone change from agricultural to business upheld.

McRae v. Knox County BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 7, 2004)
Holding: Variance overturned where there was no evidence of unique physical features,
nor satisfaction of the "negative criteria."

Campbell v. Bedford County Planning Commission (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 29, 2004)
Holding: Non-conforming property not in opertation as of the time of the adoptiong of the
zoning ordinance and therefore not protected by TCA § 13-7-208; further, declaratory
judgment brought outside of 60 days to challenge decision is time barred. Case should have
appealed from decision of zoning board within 60 days under common law writ of certiorari.

Tn Environmental Council v. Bright Par 3 Associates (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 8, 2004)
Holding: Any resident of the state of Tennessee has standing to bring suit
to enforce a conservation easement.

Bolton v. Williamson Cty Planning Commission (Williamson County Chancery Court, March 3, 2004)
Holding: Trial Court reverses denial of site plan by Planning Commission
where all requirements were met.

Hunter v. Metro BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 17, 2004)
Holding: Denial of variance affirmed; excellent example of why a
denial of a variance can never be successfully appealed.

Brentwood v. Metro BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 3, 2004)
Holding: Adjacent city has standing to contest decision of Metro zoning board regarding placement of billboard.

Lewis v. Bedford County BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, January 14, 2004)
Holding: BZA responsible for compilation, transmission and certification of record, including transcript.


2003

Metro Government v. Hudson (Tennessee Court of Appeals, December 30, 2003)
Holding: Defective notices for adoption of historic zoning may not be challenged after 10 year delay.

Shahan v Franklin County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, December 30, 2003)
Holding: No equitable estoppel against county as to acceptance of roadway.

Town of Nolensville v. King (Tennessee Court of Appeals, December 19, 2003)
Holding: No deprivation to right of trial by jury in codes enforcement
sessions case because appeal is de novo, with right to request jury.

Cherokee Country Club v. City Knoxville (Tennessee Court of Appeals, October 15, 2003)
Holding: Moratorium on construction or demolition pending adoption of historic overlay
need not comply with zoning notice statutes.

Murphy v. Zoning Commission of New Milford (CT) (Connecticut Court of Appeals, September 1, 2003)
Holding: Federal RLUIPA violated by zoning order prohibiting assembly of 25 or more people at home for worship or prayer sessions.

Alcoa v. LGPAC (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 17, 2003)

Custom Land v. Coopertown (Robertson County Chancery Court, July 7, 2003)
Holding: Non-conforming property discontinued for more than a year may not begin operations anew.

Weaver v. Knoxville BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, June 30, 2003)
Holding: BZA need not make findings of fact.

State ex rel. Moore v Cobb (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 27, 2003)
Holding: Mandamus granted for C/O; landscaping elements not included.

Hutcherson v. Lauderdale Cty BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, April 29, 2003)

Hoover v Metro BZA (Hoover IV) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 11, 2003)
(see also Hoover II and Hoover III)

Oak Hill v AAMC (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 7, 2003)


2002

Adair v Scalf (Tennessee Court of Appeals, December 11, 2002)

Johnson v. Malone (pdf) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 28, 2002)

Cato v. Montgomery County (pdf) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 23, 2002)

Jones Land Company v. Williamson County (pdf) Williamson County Chancery Court, May 16, 2002
Holding: BZA properly denied rear yard variance.

Roane County v. Joe Parker (pdf) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 13, 2002)


2001

Varner v. City of Knoxville (Tennessee Court of Appeals, November 29, 2001)

National Auto/Truck Stops v. Williamson County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, April 30, 2001)
Holding: Tenn Non-Conforming Property Act prevents amortization of accessory business sign.

South Harpeth Farms v. Metro Government (Tennessee Court of Appeals, April 5, 2001)

Citizens for a Better Johnson City v Johnson City (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 26, 2001)

Fiser v Town of Farragut (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 27, 2001)
Holding: City may not require subdivision of lot to permit additional uses if the
principal use on site is legally non-conforming under Tenn. Code Ann. 13-7-208.


2000

Domincovitch v. Wilson Cty BZA (WP format) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, November 8, 2000)

Dickson County v. Jennette (WP format) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, August 9, 2000)
Holding: Quarry which claimed to be legally non-conforming had not be established prior to adoption of county zoning and could not qualify as non-conforming use.

Toles v. City of Dyersburg (WP format) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 19, 2000)

Outdoor West v. City of Johnson City (WP format) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, June 27, 2000)

421 Corp v. Metro Nashville (Tennessee Court of Appeals, April 26, 2000)

Parker v. Roane County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 4, 2000)


1999

Youth Emergency Shelter v Wilson County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, September 3, 1999)

Hutcherson v Carter (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 12, 1999)

Advanced Sales v. Wilson County (WP)
(Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 28, 1999)

Natale v Town of Ridgefield (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 8, 1999)

Burson & Simpson v Metro Governemnt (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 5, 1999)

Culbert v Carter County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, January 5, 1999)


1998

United Neighbors v Metro and JDN (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 15, 1998)
Holding: Zoning change for Wal-Mart upheld; no contract zoning.

Chadwell v Knox County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 25, 1998)
Holding: Landfill non-conforming under terms of Tenn Non-Conforming Property Act, TCA 13-7-208; act applies both to municipalities and counties.

Scenic Helicopters v Sevierville (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 3, 1998)

Greenback Crushed Stone v Loudon County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 27, 1998)

Mormons v City of Forest Hills (Davidson County Chancery Court, February 8, 1998)
Holding: Forest Hills properly denied zoning change for relgious temple in residential area.

Citizens for Collierville v Town of Collierville (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 6, 1998)


1997

Family Golf v Metro Government (Tennessee Court of Appeals, October 10, 1997)
Holding: Reverses trial court decision of May 22, 1996; consistency with General Plan not required for zone change.

Lions Head HOA v Metro Zoning Bd (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 25, 1996)
Holding: Zoning board approval of CUP is upheld.

Westland West v Knox County (Tenn Supreme Court, July 7, 1997)
Holding: Any significant amendment to a zoning change must be reconsidered by Planning Commission prior to passage by local legislative body. Reverses Court of Appeals case of May 24, 1996.

Vowell Ventures v City of Martin (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 16, 1997)

Hoover v Metro Board of Zoning Appeals (Hoover III) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 12, 1997)
(see also Hoover II and Hoover IV)



1996

City of Church Hill v Taylor (Tennessee Court of Appeals, October 22, 1996)

Tumen v Metro BZA (Trial Court) (Davidson County Chancery Court, September 19, 1996)
Holding: Rear yard variance impropertly granted where hardship was created by owner's subdivision of property.

Lions Head Condos v Metro BZA (Tennessee Court of Appeals, July 25, 1996)
Holding: Approval of CUP by zoning board upheld.

Cone Oil v Williamson County Planning Commission (Tennessee Court of Appeals, August 16, 1996)
Holding: Conditional use permit propertly denied.

Westland West Community Association v Knox County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, May 24, 1996)
Holding: Zone change, amended on the Council floor, need not be re-submitted to Planning Commission where amendment intensifies land use previously disapproved by Commission.
Reversed on appeal.

Family Golf v Metropolitan Government (Davidson County Chancery Court, May 22, 1996)
Holding: Zoning change held invalid as contrary to General Plan and not rationally related to legitimate governmental objectives. Reversed on appeal.

First American Bank v Franklin Planning Commission (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 22, 1996)
Holding: Planning Commission properly deferred consideration of site plan until after proposed zoning change was acted upon by the local legislative body.

Carter v Green County (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 18, 1996)

Hovenden v City of Gallatin (Tennessee Court of Appeals, March 9, 1996)
Holding: City Council properly amended PUD to permit development of Wal-Mart store.

Boatman v Town of Oakland (11th Cir) (11th Circuit Court of Appeals, March 28, 1996)

Gustafson v City of Lake Angelus (6th Cir) (6th Circuit Court of Appeals, March 27, 1996)

Covington Court v Oak Brook (7th Cir) (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 22, 1996)

Ragan v Madison County Board of Zoning Appeals (Tennessee Court of Appeals, January 1, 1996)


1995

Davis Group MC v The Metropolitan Government (Tennessee Court of Appeals, November 15, 1995)
Holding: Metro Council improperly denied PUD which met all requirements of COMZO.

Hoover v Metro BZA (Hoover II) Tennessee Court of Appeals, January 5, 1995)
Holding: Improper voting procedures at zoning board require reconsideration of application.
(see also Hoover III and Hoover IV)