Mead Square Commons, LLC v. Village of Victor
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
97 A.D.3d 1162 (2012)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
The Village of Victor (defendant) prohibited operation of formula fast-food restaurants in its central-business district under Section 170-13(C)(1)(b) of its zoning ordinance. Section 170-13(C)(1)(b) defined a formula fast-food restaurant as any establishment that was required by contract, franchise, or other agreements to offer at least two of the following: (1) standardized menus or food, (2) ready-to-consume food, (3) food sold in disposable containers or wrappers, (4) food from a limited menu, (5) food sold for immediate consumption, or (6) food for which the customer pays before eating. The purpose of the regulation was to maintain Victor’s unique village character, the vitality of commercial districts, and the quality of life for residents. Mead Square Commons, LLC (Mead Square) (plaintiff) owned property in the central-business district and sought to rent commercial space for use as a Subway restaurant. A Subway restaurant qualified as a formula fast-food restaurant under Section 170-13 and was thus prohibited in the central-business district. Mead Square filed an action in the trial court for injunctive and declaratory relief to invalidate Section 170-13. Both Mead Square and Victor cross-moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted Victor’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Mead Square’s complaint.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.