Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A09-1961

Court of Appeals City of North Oaks, Appellant, vs. Rajbir S. Sarpal, et al., Respondents. ________________________

Anderson, Paul H., J.

Filed: May 11, 2011 Office of Appellate Courts

Leonard J. Schweich, Susan Steffen Tice, Jardine, Logan & O'Brien, P.L.L.P., Lake Elmo, Minnesota, for appellant. David J. Szerlag, PritzkerOlsen, P.A., Minneapolis, Minnesota, for respondents. Susan L. Naughton, St. Paul, Minnesota, for amicus curiae League of Minnesota Cities. Gerald S. Duffy, Mark Thieroff, Siegel, Brill, Greupner, Duffy & Foster, P.A., Minneapolis, Minnesota, for amicus curiae RSI Recycling, Inc. ________________________ SYLLABUS Abuse of discretion is the correct standard of review for an appellate court to apply when reviewing a district court's determination on equitable estoppel after a bench trial. When a government entity makes a simple mistake when providing a document to a party upon which the party relies when preparing a building permit, and the government entity approves the permit, that mistake is not wrongful conduct sufficient to support a 1

conclusion that a government entity is equitably estopped from enforcing its zoning ordinance. Reversed and remanded. OPINION ANDERSON, Paul H., Justice. Appellant City of North Oaks commenced an action in Ramsey County District Court against respondents Dr. Rajbir S. Sarpal and his wife, Dr. Carol L. Sarpal, alleging that the Sarpals' newly-constructed shed violates a zoning ordinance establishing a side yard setback, and also encroaches upon a trail easement. The Sarpals raised the

affirmative defense of equitable estoppel, alleging that their reliance on a misrepresentation by a City employee, and the City's approval of the permit they prepared in reliance on that misrepresentation bars the City from enforcing the zoning ordinance. After a bench trial, the district court found that the City was equitably estopped from enforcing its zoning ordinance, and dismissed the City's action. The court of appeals affirmed. We reverse and remand. Respondents Dr. Rajbir S. Sarpal1 and his wife, Dr. Carol L. Sarpal, live in North Oaks, Minnesota. They purchased a parcel of real property in 2003 from the North Oaks Company, LLC, and in 2003 or 2004, they constructed a home on that property. The Sarpals' use of their property is subject to two restrictions relevant to this action. First,

1

Dr. Carol L. Sarpal did not testify at trial, and the record is silent on her involvement in the events leading to this appeal. Therefore, our opinion uses the name "Dr. Sarpal" to refer to Dr. Rabjir Sarpal, and "Sarpals" to refer to the couple collectively. 2

the North Oaks Company reserved an easement over the northernmost 15 feet and the westernmost 15 feet of the property for use as a future trail. Under the terms contained in the deed to the property, the Sarpals are prohibited from placing or building anything on the easement that could interfere with its use as a trail. Second, the City of North Oaks Code of Ordinances

Download A09-1961, City of North Oaks, Appellant, vs. Rajbir S. Sarpal, et al., Responden

Minnesota Law