Posted by: Patricia Salkin | January 7, 2011

7th Circuit Lacks Standing to Hear Zoning Denial Where Plaintiff No Longer Owns Property and at Time of Denial, Plaintiff Had Voluntarily Dismissed Claims Earlier

Plaintiff contracted to sell property with a hotel on it so long as the buyer could obtain approval from the City to convert the hotel to a senior living center.  The City denied the permit, however, because a local ordinance prohibited senior living centers.  The Court found in favor of the City but plaintiff later moved for post-judgment relief pursuant to FRCP 60(b)(3) and asserted that the City had made misrepresentations about material facts during the zoning proceedings.  At the time, however, plaintiff no longer owned the hotel.  Plaintiff also filed a new lawsuit where he re-asserted the claims that he had previously voluntarily dismissed.  The lower court denied the FRCP 60(b)(3) claims.  

Here, the Court could not address the merits because the case was moot.  The court remanded the matter with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, because plaintiff chose to accept its loss on the administrative review claim, dismissed its claims for damages, and permitted final judgment to be entered on the merits of the zoning challenge, and because now plaintiff no longer owns the property at issue, plaintiff lacks standing to reopen the judgment on that claim. 

Parvati Corp. v. City of Oak Forest, Ill.,  2010 WL 5185835 (C.A. 7th Cir. 12/23/2010) 

The opinion can be accessed here


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: