SouthPointe Partners, LLC v. Louisville Metro Gov't
| Decision Date | 14 May 2021 |
| Docket Number | NO. 2020-CA-0195-MR,NO. 2019-CA-1784-MR,2019-CA-1784-MR,2020-CA-0195-MR |
| Parties | SOUTHPOINTE PARTNERS, LLC APPELLANT v. LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT; LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION; VINCE JARBOE, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; DAVID TOMES, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; ROBERT PETERSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; EMMA SMITH, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; LULA HOWARD, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; MARILYN LEWIS, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; JEFF BROWN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; RICH CARLSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; RUTH DANIELS, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; DONALD ROBINSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; EMILY LIU, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; JOE REVERMAN, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; JEFF O'BRIEN, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; LACEY GABBARD, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; JODY MEIMAN, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; KELLY JONES, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; AND BETH ALLEN, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY APPELLEES AND SOUTHPOINTE PARTNERS, LLC APPELLANT v. VINCE JARBOE; BETH ALLEN; DAVID TOMES; DONALD ROBINSON; EMILY LIU; EMMA SMITH; JEFF BROWN; JEFF O'BRIEN; JODY MEIMAN; JOE REVERMAN; KELLY JONES; LACEY GABBARD; LULA HOWARD; MARILYN LEWIS; RICH CARLSON; ROBERT PETERSON; AND RUTH DANIELS, ALL IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES APPELLEES |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Kentucky |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT
SouthPointe Partners, LLC ("Southpointe") appeals the judgments of Divisions Nine and Thirteen of the Jefferson Circuit Court.
SouthPointe originally filed suit against the Louisville Metro Government, the Louisville Metro Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission"), and its members, Vince Jarboe, David Tomes, Robert Peterson, Emma Smith, Lulu Howard, Marilyn Lewis, Jeff Brown, Rich Carlson, Ruth Daniels, and Donald Robinson in their official capacities; this action was assigned to Jefferson Circuit Court Division Nine. Therein, SouthPointe sought to appeal a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to KRS1 100.347 and asserted the following additional claims as against all defendants: (1) declaratory and injunctive relief; (2) negligence; (3) violation of 42 U.S.C.2 § 1983; and (4) a claim that Louisville's Land Development Code is unconstitutionally vague. After finding in SouthPointe's favor with respect to its KRS 100.347 appeal, the circuit court dismissed the remainder of SouthPointe's claims and denied it leave to amend its complaint to add claims against each of the Planning Commission members in their individual capacities.
Subsequently, SouthPointe filed a second, separate suit against the Planning Commission members in their individual capacities as well as againstseven other advisory officials, Emily Liu, Joe Reverman, Jeff O'Brien, Lacey Gabbard, Jody Meiman, Kelly Jones, and Beth Allen. This suit, which was based on the same conduct involved in the Division Nine suit, was assigned to the Division Thirteen of the Jefferson Circuit Court. This suit was ultimately dismissed after the circuit court determined that it arose from the same common nucleus of operative facts as the Division Nine suit, and therefore, was an impermissible attempt to claims split by SouthPointe.
On appeal, SouthPointe challenges: (1) the dismissal of its claims in the Division Nine suit; (2) the circuit court's denial of its motion to amend its complaint in the Division Nine suit; and (3) the circuit court's dismissal of the Division Thirteen suit. Having reviewed the record, and being otherwise sufficiently advised, we affirm as to each assignment of error.
SouthePointe, a commercial developer, is currently in the process of constructing SouthPointe Commons, a more than $80 million development in Fern Creek, Jefferson County, Kentucky. The Planning Commission approved the development in 2010, including the name of the main street of the development, "SouthPointe Boulevard." The actual construction of the development was delayed for several years as a result of unrelated litigation, but SouthPointe's predecessor-in-interest and managing member, Bardstown Capital Corporation,eventually won that litigation. Subsequently, in 2018, SouthPointe applied for the approval of a minor plat ("the Minor Plat") in the development using its previously approved street name.
While reviewing the Minor Plat, the Planning Commission discovered a preexisting street named "Southpointe Boulevard" elsewhere in town. The Planning Commission admitted that this was an oversight in its initial 2010 review but refused to approve the Minor Plat until SouthPointe changed the duplicitous street name. However, the Planning Commission also rejected SouthPointe's suggested alternative, "SouthPointe Commons Boulevard," because it was supposedly two letters too long according to a 16-letter limitation for public street names found in the Land Development Code.
Yet again, the Planning Commission asked SouthPointe to rename its main street. However, this time, SouthPointe refused, and the Planning Commission allowed SouthPointe to apply for a waiver of the 16-letter requirement. SouthPointe did so, and a hearing was scheduled on the matter. The Louisville Department of Emergency Services ("Emergency Services") objected to the waiver by written letter, asserting a number of public safety concerns,3 but did not attend the hearing.
On April 18, 2019, the Planning Commission held a second public hearing to consider SouthPointe's waiver request. This time, an Emergency Services representative appeared. Six of the ten Planning Commission members, David Tomes, Robert Peterson, Lulu Howard, Jeff Brown, Rich Carlson, and Ruth Daniels, were also present. The Planning Commission voted 4-2 that it did not have the authority to grant the requested waiver because of the purported safety and welfare requirement within the Land Development Code. The present members of the Planning Commission acknowledged that the 16-letter requirement only applied to public street names but expressed their concern on the record with regard to proceeding against the objections of Emergency Services. The Planning Commission then voted 6-0 to approve the Minor Plat - on the condition that SouthPointe change the name of its main street to an unclaimed name conforming with the 16-letter limitation.
On April 23, 2019, SouthPointe filed case No. 19-CI-002529 in Jefferson Circuit Court. This action was assigned to Division Nine. SouthPointe brought the following claims: (1) an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision pursuant to KRS 100.347; (2) a claim for declaratory and injunctive relief; (3) a negligence claim; (4) a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim; and (5) a claim that Louisville's Land Development Code is unconstitutionally vague. SouthPointe sued Louisville Metro Government, the Planning Commission, and all of thePlanning Commission's members in their official capacities (collectively referred to as "Louisville Metro"), including those who did not attend the April 18, 2019, meeting.
On June 5, 2019, SouthPointe moved for partial summary judgment on its KRS 100.347 appeal based upon the administrative record. On July 22, 2019, SouthPointe appeared at the appointed time for the hearing on its motion for partial summary judgment; however, the County Attorney representing Louisville Metro did not appear until the trial court summoned him by telephone. The circuit court refused to grant Louisville Metro a continuance and, on July 26, 2019, granted SouthPointe summary judgment on its KRS 100.347 appeal, ordering Louisville Metro to approve the Minor Plat so that construction could move forward.
On August 13, 2019, Louisville Metro moved for summary judgment on the remaining claims against it, arguing that it was protected from paying monetary damages by sovereign immunity. SouthPointe disagreed, arguing that the Claims Against Local Government Act (CALGA) contained a statutory waiver of immunity, and on August 21, 2019, moved for leave to amend its complaint. SouthPointe's proposed First Amended Complaint sought to name the Planning Commission members in their individual capacities as defendants and add six more defendants to SouthPointe's negligence claim, in both their official and individualcapacities: Emily Liu, Joe Reverman, and Lacey Gabbard (three advisory-type officials with Louisville Metro Planning and Design Services), and Jody Meiman, Kelly Jones, and Beth Allen (three advisory officials with Louisville Metro Emergency Services). The proposed First Amended Complaint alleged that, together, the individual defendants "refused to approve" SouthPointe's Minor Plat because of its 18-character street name and denied the requested waiver. SouthPointe alleged that the individual defendants had breached their "duty to perform or assist in the performance" of approving the Minor Plat in a timely manner and that none of these defendants was immune from liability.
On September 13, 2019, Division Nine denied SouthPointe's motion to amend, explaining that ame...
To continue reading
Request your trial