Chesnut v. City of Huntsville

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Chesnut v. City of Huntsville

208 So. 3d 645, 2016 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 101

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedApril 29, 2016

Docket2140043

StatusPublished

This text of 208 So. 3d 645 (Chesnut v. City of Huntsville) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chesnut v. City of Huntsville, 208 So. 3d 645, 2016 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 101 (Ala. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

After Remand from the Supreme Court of Alabama

THOMPSON, Presiding Judge.

The prior judgment of this court has been reversed and the cause remanded by the Supreme Court of Alabama. Ex parte Chesnut, 208 So.3d 624 (Ala.2016). In our opinion issued on March 27, 2015, we affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment based on the interpretation of the zoning law or regulation given by the zoning-enforcement coordinator. On certiorari review our Supreme Court determined that the deference accorded an administrative agency’s interpretation of its own rule or regulation is not boundless, and that the zoning-enforcement coordinators’s interpretation of the regulation at issue was in error; it therefore reversed our judgment. On remand to this court, and in compliance with the Supreme Gourt’s opinion, the judgment of the trial court is hereby reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

PITTMAN, THOMAS, MOORE, and DONALDSON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

After Remand from the Supreme Court of Alabama

THOMPSON, Presiding Judge.

The prior judgment of this court has been reversed and the cause remanded by the Supreme Court of Alabama. Ex parte Chesnut, 208 So.3d 624 (Ala.2016). In our opinion issued on March 27, 2015, we affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment based on the interpretation of the zoning law or regulation given by the zoning-enforcement coordinator. On certiorari review our Supreme Court determined that the deference accorded an administrative agency’s interpretation of its own rule or regulation is not boundless, and that the zoning-enforcement coordinators’s interpretation of the regulation at issue was in error; it therefore reversed our judgment. On remand to this court, and in compliance with the Supreme Gourt’s opinion, the judgment of the trial court is hereby reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

PITTMAN, THOMAS, MOORE, and DONALDSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 So. 3d 645, 2016 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chesnut-v-city-of-huntsville-alacivapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack