Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Anderson v. Island County
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
On March 11, 1966, Island Sand and Gravel, Inc. (Defendant) purchased a 17-acre tract of land in the Holmes Harbor area of Island County. On December 5, 1966, the Board of County Commissioners for Island County (Board) zoned the Holmes Harbor area as residential. Around this time, Defendant began building a cement batching plant on its property. On September 22, 1969, Defendant petitioned to have its land rezoned to commercial. The Island County Planning Commission denied the request. On appeal, the Board rezoned Defendant's land to commercial, leaving a ten foot wide green belt of land between its batching plant and its neighbors. The Andersons, residents of Holmes Harbor, and neighboring property owners (Plaintiffs) sued in the superior court to review the Board’s decision to rezone Defendant’s property. They specifically argued that: (1) the Board’s decision to rezone was arbitrary and capricious, and (2) the rezoning constituted spot zoning. The trial court reviewed the findings of the Board and noted that: (1) when the Board rezoned the Holmes Harbor area as residential, it had intended to allow pre-existing nonconforming uses to continue; (2) the poor soil quality of Defendant’s land made it unsuitable for residential development; (3) the services of Defendant were necessary to the island; (4) Defendant was one of the few areas of employment in the vicinity; and (5) the operation of a batching plant would be compatible with the surrounding area because of the green belt separating the plant from the neighboring residences. Based on these findings, the trial court found that the Board’s finding was not arbitrary and capricious, and therefore sustained the decision.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.