Summary
The Virginia Supreme Court considered whether a referendum petition seeking repeal of four related Norfolk ordinances was invalid because it combined the ordinances in a single petition. The court upheld the intervention of the City of Norfolk and the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, but held that the petition complied with the City Charter and applicable law. The court reversed the dismissal of the petition and remanded for further proceedings.
Holdings
- The circuit court did not abuse its discretion in granting the City of Norfolk's and NRHA's motions to intervene.
- A referendum petition is not invalid merely because it lists multiple ordinances, and the petitioners were not required to circulate a separate petition for each challenged ordinance.
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by allowing the City of Norfolk and NRHA to intervene despite the timing of their motions.
- Whether a referendum petition seeking repeal of four related ordinances was invalid because it listed the ordinances together rather than in separate petitions.
- Whether the circuit court improperly granted summary judgment sua sponte for the City and NRHA.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (4)
- Hudson v. Jarrett, 269 Va. 24, 33, 606 S.E.2d 827, 831 (2005)(followed)
- R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. Committee for the Repeal of Ordinance R(C)-88-13, 239 Va. 484, 489, 391 S.E.2d 587, 589 (1990)(followed)
- City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enters., Inc., 426 U.S. 668, 673, 678, 96 S. Ct. 2358, 49 L. Ed. 2d 132 (1976)(followed)
- Collins v. City of Norfolk, 244 Va. 431, 434, 422 S.E.2d 782, 783 (1992)(applied)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…