Emac, L.L.C. v. County of Hanover (Virginia 2016)

Summary

The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the circuit court's grant of a demurrer, holding that EMAC failed to allege that it was similarly situated with Northlake and therefore could not state a valid claim of impermissible discrimination; the Board's decision was fairly debatable and rational. Justice Powell filed a dissent arguing that the parties were similarly situated and the demurrer was improper.

Holding

Whether the circuit court erred in granting the demurrer by requiring EMAC to allege that the existing zoning ordinance was unreasonable as applied to its property. The circuit court did not err; EMAC must allege that it is similarly situated with the party receiving the permit to state a claim of impermissible discrimination, which it failed to do.

Whether the Board's denial of an extension to EMAC was arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory and therefore unreasonable. The circuit court correctly found the denial was fairly debatable and supported by a rational basis, so the demurrer was proper.