Scottsbluff Improvement Ass'n v. City of Scottsbluff

164 N.W.2d 215, 183 Neb. 722, 1969 Neb. LEXIS 677
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 17, 1969
Docket36969
StatusPublished
Cited by58 cases

This text of 164 N.W.2d 215 (Scottsbluff Improvement Ass'n v. City of Scottsbluff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Scottsbluff Improvement Ass'n v. City of Scottsbluff, 164 N.W.2d 215, 183 Neb. 722, 1969 Neb. LEXIS 677 (Neb. 1969).

Opinion

Newton, J.

This is an error proceeding taken from the action of the mayor and council of the city of Scottsbluff in adopting a rezoning ordinance. The action was dismissed by the triál court and we affirm the judgment.

*723 It appears that there is a jurisdictional feature present which prevents our considering this cause on its merits. A zoning ordinance constitutes the exercise of a governmental and legislative function and a city council adopting a rezoning ordinance which amends a general zoning ordinance acts in a legislative capacity. See, Johnston v. City of Claremont, 49 Cal. 2d 826, 323 P. 2d 71; Besselman v. City of Moses Lake, 46 Wash. 2d 279, 280 P. 2d 689; McQuail v. Shell Oil Co., 40 Del. Ch. 396, 183 A. 2d 572; D’Angelo v. Knights of Columbus Bldg. Assn., 89 R. I. 76, 151 A. 2d 495; In re Clements’ Appeal, 2 Ohio App. 2d 201, 207 N. E. 2d 573; Anthony v. City of Kewanee, 79 Ill. App. 2d 243, 223 N. E. 2d 738.

In Williams v. County of Buffalo, 181 Neb. 233, 147 N. W. 2d 776, we held that an appeal or error proceeding does not lie from a purely legislative act by a public body to which legislative power has been delegated. We further stated that the only remedy in such cases is by collateral attack, that is, by injunction or other suitable action.

In Longe v. County of Wayne, 175 Neb. 245, 121 N. W. 2d 196, this court held that review by error proceeding is allowed under section 25-1901, R. R. S. 1943, only when a tribunal acts judicially. Such is not the case here.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed,

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

Related

Main St Properties v. City of Bellevue
968 N.W.2d 625 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2022)
Landrum v. City of Omaha Planning Bd.
297 Neb. 165 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2017)
Hawkins v. City of Omaha
627 N.W.2d 118 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2001)
Giger v. City of Omaha
442 N.W.2d 182 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1989)
Van Heek v. County of Knox
334 N.W.2d 641 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1983)
Andrews v. City of Fremont
328 N.W.2d 194 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1982)
Copple v. City of Lincoln
315 N.W.2d 628 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1982)
City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc.
426 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Denney v. City of Duluth
202 N.W.2d 892 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1972)
Hoover v. Carpenter
197 N.W.2d 11 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
164 N.W.2d 215, 183 Neb. 722, 1969 Neb. LEXIS 677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scottsbluff-improvement-assn-v-city-of-scottsbluff-neb-1969.