Fritz v. City of Kingman

957 P.2d 337 (1998)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Fritz v. City of Kingman

Arizona Supreme Court
957 P.2d 337 (1998)

Facts

The City of Kingman (defendant) adopted a general zoning plan in 1992, which established the area in which Kiersten Fritz (plaintiff) owned property as one that could accommodate one to four residences per acre. At the time of adoption, Fritz’s land was specifically designated R-R, a code allowing only one dwelling per acre. In 1997, Fritz requested that her land be reclassified as R-1-8 so as to allow for up to four dwellings per acre, still consistent with the general plan. The City honored the request. Thereafter, the Committee for Responsible Rezoning petitioned for the City’s decision to be referred for review by the electorate. Fritz brought suit, seeking rejection of the referendum petitions. Fritz moved for summary judgment, contending that the rezoning decision was an administrative act not subject to a referendum. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that the decision was instead a legislative act. Fritz appealed, arguing that the 1992 general plan that permitted one to four residences per acre in the area in which her land was located was itself a legislative act on which opposing parties could and should have sought a referendum, unlike the later reclassification.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Gerber, J.)

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 814,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership