Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by Lavern Bourgeois, the Building Official for Ascension Parish, against a trial court judgment that granted a writ of mandamus ordering him to revoke a reinstated building permit. The landowner originally obtained the permit for a 7,500 square foot building in 1999, which later became a nonconforming use under a newly adopted Development Code. Bourgeois reinstated the permit in 2003 without requiring a development permit, based on the Zoning Official's view that the new code could not be applied retroactively. Neighbor Francis King sued for mandamus relief, which the trial court granted, but Bourgeois appealed, arguing that the revocation was a discretionary act. The appellate court emphasized that mandamus applies to clear legal duties and is inappropriate in cases involving discretion. It found no non-discretionary duty for Bourgeois to revoke the permit and highlighted the Zoning Official's interpretation that allowed 'grandfathering' of the property. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's judgment and vacated the order, deeming that Bourgeois did not abuse his discretion, and assessed costs to King.
Legal Issues Addressed
Discretionary Acts under Louisiana Lawsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that revocation of the building permit was a discretionary act, and King failed to demonstrate that Bourgeois had a clear duty to deny the permit or acted arbitrarily.
Reasoning: King failed to demonstrate that Bourgeois had a clear duty to deny the building permit or that he abused any discretion he may have had.
Mandamus Relief and Ministerial Dutiessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reversed the trial court's issuance of a writ of mandamus, emphasizing that such relief is only appropriate to compel a public officer to perform a clear legal duty, not in cases involving discretion or judgment.
Reasoning: The court noted that a writ of mandamus compels a public officer to perform a clear legal duty and is not issued in doubtful cases.
Nonconforming Use and Zoning Codessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the reinstatement of the building permit was valid under the Zoning Official's interpretation, which allowed 'grandfathering' of properties that had been permitted before the adoption of the new Development Code.
Reasoning: The Zoning Official affirmed his interpretation that these properties were exempt from the Development Code's requirements and that Bourgeois had consulted him before reinstating the permit.