Summary
The Supreme Court of Arkansas held that a county quorum court’s decision on a conditional-use permit was quasi-judicial because it applied existing zoning-ordinance criteria to the facts of the application. Accordingly, the circuit court erred by applying an arbitrary-and-capricious standard rather than conducting de novo review. The court reversed and remanded and vacated the court of appeals’ opinion, declining to reach the constitutional and moot issues.
Holdings
- A county quorum court's decision granting or denying a conditional use permit under an ordinance requiring application of specified criteria to the applicant's facts is quasi-judicial, not legislative, when the decision applies existing ordinance provisions rather than creating or amending law.
- Because the Quorum Court acted in a quasi-judicial capacity, the circuit court was required to conduct de novo review rather than apply an arbitrary-and-capricious standard.
- The court did not decide the constitutionality of Arkansas Code Annotated section 14-17-211 because that question was not essential to resolving the appeal.
- The court did not reach whether the Quorum Court acted arbitrarily and capriciously because that issue became moot after the court determined that the circuit court applied the wrong standard of review.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Quorum Court's denial of MMSC's conditional use permit was a quasi-judicial act requiring de novo review by the circuit court or a legislative act subject only to arbitrary-and-capricious review.
- Whether the circuit court properly declared Arkansas Code Annotated section 14-17-211 unconstitutional to the extent it required de novo review of county legislative zoning issues.
- Whether the Quorum Court's denial of the conditional use permit was arbitrary and capricious.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (9)
- Scoggins v. Medlock, 2011 Ark. 194, 381 S.W.3d 781(followed)
- Ark. Pub. Defender Comm’n v. Pulaski Cty. Circuit Court, 2010 Ark. 224, 365 S.W.3d 193(followed)
- City of Fort Smith v. McCutchen, 372 Ark. 541, 279 S.W.3d 78 (2008)(followed)
- PH, LLC v. City of Conway, 2009 Ark. 504, 344 S.W.3d 660(followed)
- Camden Cmty. Dev. Corp. v. Sutton, 339 Ark. 368, 5 S.W.3d 439 (1999)(followed)
- King’s Ranch of Jonesboro, Inc. v. City of Jonesboro, 2011 Ark. 123(followed)
- Bolen v. Washington County Zoning Bd. of Adjustments, 2011 Ark. App. 319, 384 S.W.3d 33(overruled)
- Williams v. St. Vincent Infirmary Med. Ctr., 2021 Ark. 14, 615 S.W.3d 721(followed)
- Citizens for a Better Pope Cty. v. Cross, 2020 Ark. 279, 606 S.W.3d 580 (per curiam)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…