Nassau County v. Willis
District Court of Appeal of Florida
41 So.3d 270 (2010)
- Written by Anjali Bhat, JD
Facts
Nassau County, Florida (Nassau) (defendant) had a comprehensive plan that prohibited the development of designated wetlands at a density greater than one residential-dwelling unit per five acres. The comprehensive plan also permitted that those areas determined not to be wetlands by Nassau with the advice of the St. Johns River Water Management District (Water Management District) could be developed at the least intense adjacent land-use density. In 2006, the Water Management District determined that 71.58 acres of Crane Island, which had previously been designated as wetlands, were in fact uplands and not wetlands. Accordingly, Nassau categorized those 71.58 acres as low-density residential and approved the acres’ development at a density of two dwelling units per acre. Lynwood Willis and other adjoining landowners (plaintiffs) challenged Nassau’s interpretation of the comprehensive plan, arguing that the interpretation led to an absurd result, because its application significantly changed the land-use designation of 71.58 acres of land. The plaintiffs also argued that Nassau had made prior attempts to amend the comprehensive plan to achieve the same result. The trial court agreed that Nassau’s interpretation would lead to an absurd result and quashed the ordinance approving the low-density development. Nassau appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.