ARTICLE
22 April 2013

Equal Protection Claims Concerning Disparate Enforcement Of Environmental Laws Remain An Uphill Battle

FH
Foley Hoag LLP

Contributor

Foley Hoag provides innovative, strategic legal services to public, private and government clients. We have premier capabilities in the life sciences, healthcare, technology, energy, professional services and private funds fields, and in cross-border disputes. The diverse experiences of our lawyers contribute to the exceptional senior-level service we deliver to clients.
In Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, the Supreme Court gave hope to developers and property owners that the equal protection clause could be used to prevent local zoning and environmental officials from engaging in disparate treatment against disfavored residents.
United States Environment

In 2000, in its 2-page per curiam opinion in Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, the Supreme Court gave hope to developers and property owners that the equal protection clause could be used to prevent local zoning and environmental officials from engaging in disparate treatment against disfavored residents.  The Court stated that one may bring an equal protection claim as a "class of one" where

the plaintiff alleges that she has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment.

Since Olech, however, the Courts of Appeal have been doing their best to limit Olech's reach.  The most recent decision, in Freeman v. Town of Hudson, was issued on Monday by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Freemans complained that the Town Conservation Commission's enforcement of a conservation restriction on their property stemmed from personal animus and was inconsistent with the lack of enforcement by the Commission against the Freemans' neighbors.

The Court was having none of it, concluding that the neighbors were not similarly situated (and so not even reaching the rational basis test).  The Court noted that the Freeman's allegations about their neighbors did not concern violations of the conservation restriction that was at the heart of the Commission action against the Freemans.

We have held that class-of-one claims require "an extremely high degree of similarity between [the plaintiffs] and the persons to whom they compare themselves." In the land-use context, this means more than "point[ing] to nearby parcels in a vacuum and leav[ing] it to the municipality to disprove conclusory allegations that the owners of those parcels are similarly situated."

In short, if one want to bring an equal protection claim against a regulator under Olech, the complaint must allege disparate treatment by the regulator where the facts of the situation used to demonstrate the lack of equal protection really are on all fours with the facts underlying the enforcement action against the plaintiff.

To view Foley Hoag's Law and the Environment Blog please click here

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More