Preview Mode Links will not work in preview mode

Oral Arguments of the Supreme Court of Virginia


Jun 30, 2019

This podcast is provided by Ben Glass and Steve Emmert

 

www.BenGlassReferrals.com - www.Virginia-Appeals.com

 

Granted Appeal Summary

 

Case

 

LOCH LEVAN LAND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ET AL. v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF HENRICO COUNTY, ET AL. (Record Number 181043) 

 

From 

 

The Circuit Court of Henrico County; C. Maxfield, Judge.

 

Counsel

 

Joseph R. Pope and T. Preston Lloyd, Jr. (Williams Mullen) for appellants.

 

Joseph P. Rapisarda, Jr., J.T. Tokarz, and John D. Gilbody (Henrico County Attorney’s Office) for appellees. 

 

Assignments of Error

 

  1. The trial court erred in holding that HHHunt did not have a vested right to the continuation of Dominion Club Drive under Va. Code § 15.2-2261. 1A: The trial court erred in holding that Va. Code § 15.2-2261(F) did not apply even though HHHunt recorded plats of subdivided property that had been conveyed to third parties. 

 

  1. The trial court erred in holding that HHHunt did not possess constitutionally guaranteed vested rights in the continuation of Dominion Club Drive. 

 

  1. The trial court erred in holding that the County properly employed the abandonment provisions of Title 33.2 to eliminate the extension of Dominion Club Drive, rather than the appropriate provisions of Title 15.2 relating to subdivisions. 

 

  1. Even assuming that the County correctly employed Title 33.2 for the abandonment of the right of way, the trial court erred in finding that the abandonment was a legislative act subject to the fairly-debatable standard. 

 

  1. Even assuming that Title 33.2 applied and actions thereunder are subject to the fairly debatable standard, the trial court erred in holding that the abandonment of the right of way was 2 for a proper public purpose, as the abandonment was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable, and not fairly debatable.

 

  1. The trial court erred in finding that public opposition per se is a legitimate basis for sustaining the abandonment of a right of way that has been a critical part of HHHunt’s long term development plan, and of which the County and the residents of Wyndham have known for decades. 

 

Source Document: http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/scv/appeals/181043.pdf