Moffatt v. Forrest City
Arkansas Supreme Court
234 Ark. 12, 350 S.W.2d 327 (1961)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
In 1951, Louie Moffatt and his wife (plaintiffs) purchased a home in the residential district of Forrest City (defendant). In 1954, the Moffatts made additions to the home and began operating a meat market and meat processing plant in the additions. As business increased, the Moffatts expanded and made new additions to the meat-market portion of the premises. In 1959, Forrest City adopted a zoning ordinance that classified the district where the Moffatts’ home was located as entirely residential. Under the new zoning ordinance, the Moffatts’ market was a nonconforming use. The zoning ordinance provided that if a building operating for a nonconforming use is damaged for 60 percent or more of its reproduction value, exclusive of foundations, the building cannot be restored for a nonconforming use. In 1960, a fire destroyed nearly the entire residential portion of the Moffatts’ home and substantially damaged the market portion. Once the Moffatts began repairs on the market to resume business, Forrest City brought suit to enjoin the Moffatts from any reconstruction. Forrest City argued that because 60 percent of the house was destroyed, the Moffatts were not permitted to restore the property for the nonconforming use as a meat market. The chancery court found in favor of Forrest City and enjoined the reconstruction of any building on the Moffatt’s property for use as a market. It was undisputed that the residence portion of the house was a total loss, and experts testified that the total damage for the house exceeded 60 percent. The Moffatts appealed, arguing that the market was one building, and the residence was another.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McFaddin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.