Hennigh v. Board of County Com'rs of Boulder County, 23612
| Decision Date | 10 February 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 23612,23612 |
| Citation | 450 P.2d 73,168 Colo. 128 |
| Parties | Harold HENNIGH, Fern Hennigh, and Ronald Gregory, Plaintiffs in Error, v. The BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF the COUNTY OF BOULDER, State of Colorado, the Board of Adjustment of the County of Boulder, State of Colorado, and the County Building Inspector of the County of Boulder, State of Colorado, Defendants in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Klauber, Kayne & Kerner, Boulder, for plaintiffs in error.
No appearance for defendants in error.
*
Plaintiffs in error Harold and Fern Hennigh are joint owners of real estate situated in the 'immediate vicinity' of real property owned by Martin Marietta Company in Boulder county. Plaintiff in error Gregory is the owner of other real property similarly situated. All plaintiffs in error will be referred to as plaintiffs. Martin Marietta Company will hereinafter be referred to as the corporation.
It is alleged in their complaint that the above named corporation submitted a request to the Boulder County Board of Adjustment for a variance permitting the corporation to construct buildings on its property with heights in excess of the limitations of the zoning restrictions fixed by the applicable zoning resolutions of Boulder county.
The application for variance was approved by the defendants in error in proceedings conducted in various stages before the purported Board of Adjustment and the Board of County Commissioners. In review of these proceedings before the district court the variance granted by the defendants in error was approved. Plaintiffs who appeared in opposition to the application for the variance are here on writ of error and urge a reversal of the judgment upon several grounds.
No good purpose would be served by setting forth in this opinion the grounds upon which the plaintiffs rely for reversal. Martin Marietta Company, the applicant in proceedings before the Board of Adjustment, benefited by the orders entered following the hearings on its application. It was the moving and prevailing party before the Board of Adjustment and is an indispensable party to any proceedings in the trial court and in this court, the purpose of which is to invalidate the action of the Board of Adjustment, R.C.P.Colo. 19. The corporation was not made a party in the review proceedings before the district court. Nothing in the record indicates that it had any notice that the action of the Board of Adjustment was under attack in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schroeder v. Burleigh County Bd. of Com'rs
...stated in Hidden Lake Development Co. v. District Court, 183 Colo. 168, 515 P.2d 632, 635 (1973): "In Hennigh (Hennigh v. County Commissioners, 168 Colo. 128, 450 P.2d 73 (1969)) this court dismissed an appeal holding the court's judgment a nullity when an indispensable party was not before......
-
State ex rel. Henze v. Wetzel
...3d, § 27.21 at 521 et seq. (1986); Sturmer v. Readington, 90 N.J.Super. 341, 217 A.2d 622 (1966); Hennigh v. Board of County Com'rs. of Colo. of Boulder, 168 Colo. 128, 450 P.2d 73 (banc 1969); Lanaux v. New Orleans, Bd. of Zoning, 489 So.2d 329 (La.App.1986); 7 P. Rohan, Zoning and Land Us......
-
Thorne v. Board of County Com'rs of Fremont County, 80SA510
...577 P.2d 277 (1978); Hidden Lake Development Co. v. District Court, 183 Colo. 168, 515 P.2d 632 (1973); Hennigh v. Board of County Commissioners, 168 Colo. 128, 450 P.2d 73 (1969). The tribunal whose acts are to be reviewed is an indispensable party to the subsequent 106(a)(4) action. E.g.,......
-
Monus v. Colorado Baseball 1993, Inc.
... ... See, e.g., Cox v. Freemont County Public Building Authority, 415 F.2d 882, 886 ... ...
-
Winning the Rezoning
...Co. v. District Court, County of Adams, 183 Colo. 168, 515 P.2d 632 (1973); Hennigh v. Board of County Commissioners, County of Boulder, 168 Colo. 128, 450 P.2d 73 (1969). 21. The 1981 amendment to Rule 106(b) adds the following sentence: A timely petition or writ may be amended at any time......