From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gary v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Supreme Court of Virginia
Apr 26, 1993
429 S.E.2d 875 (Va. 1993)

Summary

finding the appeal was not ripe because the board had not made a decision regarding the property in dispute and, thus, had not "exhausted" its "powers" over the controversy

Summary of this case from Prashad v. Copeland

Opinion

48800 Record No. 921619 Circuit Court No. C92-280/C1679-92

April 26, 1993.

Upon an appeal from a judgment rendered by the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk on the 29th day of July, 1992.


ORDER

VIRGINIA:

In the Supreme Court of Virginia held at the Supreme Court Building in the City of Richmond on Monday the 26th day of April, 1993.


Upon consideration of the record, briefs, and argument of counsel, the Court is of opinion that no error exists in the judgment of the circuit court.

The record discloses that the Board of Zoning Appeal (BZA) remanded the enforcement action to the zoning administrator, ordering the administrator to continue his ongoing enforcement activities and also to address the appellant's complaints, which included whether the current use of the subject property is an unlawful nonconforming use and whether there are nonconforming structures on the premises that should be ordered removed.

In addition, the circuit court's July 17, 1992 order, affirmed by the circuit court in its July 29, 1992 order, provided that the sustaining of the appellees' motion for summary judgment "shall in no way be an impediment or restriction" on the future rights of the appellant "once the decision of the Zoning Administrator with reference to this subject matter has been issued."

According to the record on appeal, the powers of the BZA have not been exhausted because no decision on the nonconforming status of the property has been made. Therefore, the matter was not ripe for consideration by the circuit court and summary judgment in favor of the appellees was properly entered.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, without prejudice to the appellant's right to contest any decision the BZA make regarding the nonconforming status of the subject property. The appellant shall pay to the appellees thirty dollars damages.

This order shall be certified to the said circuit court.

A Copy, Teste: David B. Beach, Clerk


Summaries of

Gary v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Supreme Court of Virginia
Apr 26, 1993
429 S.E.2d 875 (Va. 1993)

finding the appeal was not ripe because the board had not made a decision regarding the property in dispute and, thus, had not "exhausted" its "powers" over the controversy

Summary of this case from Prashad v. Copeland
Case details for

Gary v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Case Details

Full title:Wiley G. Gary, Appellant against Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of…

Court:Supreme Court of Virginia

Date published: Apr 26, 1993

Citations

429 S.E.2d 875 (Va. 1993)
429 S.E.2d 875

Citing Cases

Prashad v. Copeland

Here, Prashad filed the request for registration of the four North Carolina orders "with a simultaneous…