Breland v. City of Fairhope, [Ms. 1131057, 1131210, Sept. 30, 2016] __ So.3d__ (Ala. 2016). The Court reverses a summary judgment entered by the Baldwin Circuit Court in favor of the City of Fairhope and against a landowner in an action seeking declaratory relief and damages based on Fairhope's conduct in issuing stop-work orders based on local ordinances purporting to regulate wetlands located within the City's planning jurisdiction.
The Court first determines that no statute of limitations applies to an action seeking prospective relief through a complaint for a declaratory judgment. Ms. *20-27.
As to Breland's damages claim based on losses incurred as a consequence of Fairhope's stop-work order, the Court applies the two-year limitations period found in § 6-2-38(l), Ala. Code 1975, citing Baugus v. City of Florence, 985 So.2d 413 (Ala. 2007) (Ms. *29-31). The Court holds that each time Fairhope enforced its ordinances to stop Breland from filling activity on this property, Fairhope committed a new act that served as a basis for a new claim.
Accordingly, the summary judgment entered by the Baldwin Circuit Court against Breland on statute-of-statute limitations grounds is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
Related Documents: Breland v City of Fairhope