Acton v. Jackson County

Missouri Court of Appeals
854 S.W.2d 447 (1993)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Expanding a lawful, nonconforming land use to include an illegal activity constitutes a change in the character of the use, which terminates the right to continue that nonconforming use.

Facts:

Theodore Irving, II, began operating a massage parlor at 8603 East Truman Road in 1974, which was considered a lawful nonconforming use under later zoning ordinances.
In 1983, Irving transferred the property to his mother, Juanita Irving, who continued to operate the massage parlor.
In 1984, law enforcement discovered that prostitution was occurring on the premises with the knowledge of the Irvings.
A court subsequently declared the massage parlor a public nuisance due to the prostitution and ordered it to be closed for approximately one year.
After the closure period, Keith Acton acquired the property and sought a permit to operate a massage parlor, claiming the right to continue the prior nonconforming use.
Jackson County authorities refused to issue the permit, asserting that the property had lost its nonconforming use status.

Procedural Posture:

Keith Acton sued Jackson County in a state trial court, seeking a declaratory judgment and an injunction to permit him to operate a massage parlor.
The trial court ruled in favor of Acton, finding he could continue the nonconforming use.
Jackson County (appellant) appealed the trial court's judgment to the Missouri Court of Appeals, with Acton as the appellee.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does expanding a lawful nonconforming use to include illegal activity, such as prostitution, terminate the right to continue that nonconforming use?

Opinions:

Majority - Spinden, J.

Yes, expanding a lawful nonconforming use to include illegal activity terminates the right to continue that nonconforming use. The court reasoned that nonconforming uses are disfavored in zoning law, and public policy dictates they should be eliminated as quickly as justly possible. The previous owners did not merely maintain the nonconforming use of a massage parlor; they fundamentally changed its character by expanding it to include the illegal activity of prostitution. This expansion from a lawful to an unlawful use terminated the right to the nonconforming use. Because the right was lost before Acton acquired the property, he cannot claim it and must comply with current zoning ordinances.

Analysis:

This decision reinforces the principle that nonconforming use status is a fragile privilege, not a vested right, and is subject to strict interpretation. It establishes that introducing illegality is not just a temporary violation but a fundamental change in the use's character that extinguishes the grandfathered protection permanently. The ruling strengthens the ability of municipalities to eliminate disfavored uses and puts property owners on notice that the nonconforming status can be lost not only through abandonment or destruction but also through unlawful expansion. This precedent affects subsequent purchasers, who cannot revive a nonconforming use right once it has been terminated by a prior owner's actions.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Acton v. Jackson County (1993)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"