Petersen v. Riverton City

Utah Supreme Court 

2010 UT 58, 243 P.3d 1261

     Parties have two options when confronted with an unfavorable municipal land-use decision.  They can either file a petition for review pursuant to Section 801 of LUDMA, or they may file a complaint against the land-use authority, which may include a variety of claims, including constitutional claims.

     An abstract need or a unilateral expectation of a benefit does not constitute property. A property interest exists only where existing rules and understandings that stem from in an independent source, such as state law, secure certain benefits and support claims of entitlement to those benefits.

Full Text of Petersen v. Riverton City

RETURN to Appeals From Land Use Decisions

Link to Appellate Decisions Section

Advertisements