Can a township be legally held liable for failing to enforce development agreements?

[Bruce Davis IX]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New Jersey

Here is the scenario: A New Jersey township approves a private construction project requiring many variances, contingent upon the developer agreeing to abide by several other conditions mandated by the township in order to reduce the project's impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The developer fails to abide by one or more of those conditions, and said failure results in nearby properties being negatively impacted. Despite being advised of the infractions, the township subsequently reverses course, allows the developer to occupy the premises without a certificate of occupancy, and the development is allowed to proceed without enforcing all conditions of the development agreement.

Can the township be held liable? How about the developer? And what type of attorney should an aggrieved party contact?

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

What is your aggrievement? Are we talking thousands in damages or no where for your poodle to take a dump?

 

[Bruce Davis IX]

What is your aggrievement? Are we talking thousands in damages or no where for your poodle to take a dump?

I may answer your question once you answer mine... unless you're just trolling, of course

 

[LeeHarveyBlotto]

I may answer your question once you answer mine... unless you're just trolling, of course

It's a valid question. Do you want help or not?

 

[LdiJ]

I may answer your question once you answer mine... unless you're just trolling, of course

Lets see...you come to an internet forum asking for advice. You are asked for more information in order for a response to be formulated. Instead of answering the question you state the above.

Go pay an attorney for advice. We volunteers here don't have the energy to waste.

 

[154NH773]

You were asked a legitimate question, since you asked if the town could be held "liable" and that would depend if you had "damages".
I am not a lawyer, and this is somewhat outside my experience, but I have sued a town over failing to adhere to their zoning ordinance.
You will find that trying to force a town to follow the law can be very difficult. Towns have great discretion in enforcing ordinances, and in most cases private citizens not immediately abutting the offending property do not have standing to object.
I don 't think it will be possible for you to get a good answer here, since it may be very complicated depending on many factors.
I suggest you talk to a local land use lawyer.

 

[PaulMass]

You can certainly sue the developer and the township. Whether you would prevail depends on facts not given.

The amount of damages is not generally a consideration on liability. Either the defendant is liable or not. If liability is established, the next step is to determine the damages.

For example, it may not be worth spending $50,000 on legal fees and costs to force the developer to provide a place for you dog to dump.

If may be worth spending $50,000 on legal fees if the developer has caused your property to decrease $1,000,000 in value.

 

[154NH773]

Without getting too technical;
"Liability requires evidence of the duty to act, the failure to fulfill that duty, and the connection (proximate cause) of that failure to some injury or harm to the plaintiff."

So, there must be some damage.

As I said, towns have great discretion to enforce, and much immunity if they don't follow the "rules".

 

[PaulMass]

Without getting too technical;
"Liability requires evidence of the duty to act, the failure to fulfill that duty, and the connection (proximate cause) of that failure to some injury or harm to the plaintiff."

So, there must be some damage.

As I said, towns have great discretion to enforce, and much immunity if they don't follow the "rules".

Care to provide a citation for that definition of "liability"?

 

[154NH773]

OK, the strict definition of liability doesn't really include damages, liability means legal responsibility for one's acts or omissions, but in the context of the OP's question I think it's fair to infer he was talking about stopping the town from "damaging" his interests.
So, it's reasonable to ask what his damages are, because without damages he may have no standing to sue to make the town adhere to its' variance conditions.

 

[justalayman]

Care to provide a citation for that definition of "liability"?

well, actually he is pretty close. Unless there is something to be liable for (damages), there can be no liability. One may be responsible (culpable) for the conditions resulting from their actions but liability IS being responsible for the value of the damages.

I believe you have confused liability with culpability given your statement.

 

[justalayman]

OK, the strict definition of liability doesn't really include damages, liability means legal responsibility for one's acts or omissions, but in the context of the OP's question I think it's fair to infer he was talking about stopping the town from "damaging" his interests.
So, it's reasonable to ask what his damages are, because without damages he may have no standing to sue to make the town adhere to its' variance conditions.

you were right the first time.

 

[154NH773]

The OP could sue for a writ of mandamus to force the town to act; however he must have standing, and the town's action, or lack of action, cannot be discretionary.
The "discretionary" nature of the action may be the hardest to determine, and will probably require caselaw investigation.

From Wikipedia (sorry for the non-legal citation):

The applicant pleading for the writ of mandamus to be enforced should be able to show that he or she has a legal right to compel the respondent to do or refrain from doing the specific act. The duty sought to be enforced must have two qualities:[1] It must be a duty of public nature and the duty must be imperative and should not be discretionary. Furthermore, mandamus will typically not be granted if adequate relief can be obtained by some other means, such as appeal.