Justia Idaho Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Plaintiff-Appellant James Wylie owned a subdivision in the City of Meridian. He sought a declaration from the district court that the City and the Idaho Transportation Department improperly denied access for his property directly onto a nearby state highway. The district court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint on the ground that he failed to present a “justiciable issue.” The Supreme Court’s review of the record revealed that Plaintiff acquired the land in question subject to certain conditions recorded in the plat for the subdivision. The plat listed plainly that “the subject property does have frontage along [the state highway] but . . . not direct access [to the highway].” The Court reasoned that Plaintiff failed to bring an issue for the Court to resolve since Plaintiff’s recorded deed clearly listed the frontage road as access to his property. Therefore, the Court reasoned that the case was “non-justiciable” and affirmed the lower court’s decision to dismiss Plaintiff’s case. View "Wylie v. Idaho Bd of Transportation" on Justia Law

Petitioners-Appellants Douglas and Michelle Stafford obtained a building permit to construct an addition to their residence on Lake Coeur d'Alene in Kootenai County. A framing inspector advised the Appellants' contractor that they would not receive a certificate of occupancy because the landscaping violated the County site disturbance ordinance. The ordinance provided that lots with frontage on the Lake maintain a 25-foot natural vegetation buffer from the water line. Appellants were served a notice of violation of the ordinance, and were directed to prepare a remediation plan to return a portion of the property back to its natural state. Because Appellants were in violation of the site disturbance violation, the zoning board withheld an occupancy permit for Appellants' entire residence. They appealed to the district court which upheld the zoning board. On review, the Supreme Court found problems with the overlapping zoning ordinances in place at the time Appellants sought to develop their property. Appellants argued that the board cited them under the wrong ordinance. But the Court found no statute granting judicial review of administrative proceedings enforcing a zoning ordinance. The Court vacated the district court decision and remanded this case to dismiss Appellants' petition for judicial review. View "Stafford v. Kootenai County" on Justia Law