Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Evans v. Teton County

Supreme Court of Idaho
73 P.3d 84 (2003)


Facts

Teton Springs, L.L.C. (Teton Springs) proposed to turn undeveloped farmland and wetland in the County of Teton (defendant) into a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that would consist of a golf course and a residential resort. When Teton Springs filed an application for the approval of the PUD, Teton Springs also requested rezoning. The Teton County Board of County Commissioners (the Board) granted Teton Springs’s application. Richard Evans and Matthew Finnegan (plaintiffs), who were residents of Teton County, brought suit challenging the Board’s decision as a violation of the Teton County Zoning Ordinance (the zoning ordinance), the Teton County Subdivision Ordinance (the subdivision ordinance), and the Teton County Comprehensive Plan (the Plan). Specifically, the plaintiffs argued that the Board’s decision violated: (1) the subdivision ordinance’s restriction that only 2 percent of the land may be developed for uses incompatible with underlying zoning and (2) the zoning ordinance’s prohibition on residential, commercial, or industrial (RCI) PUDs in that zone. The plaintiffs also claimed that the Board’s decision violated the Plan, because the PUD’s density was impermissibly high. The district court affirmed the Board’s decision. The plaintiffs appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Kidwell, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 222,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.