After town planning commission filed complaint for mandatory injunction against property owner, seeking court order requiring owner to remove pond from property, owner counterclaimed against commission and brought third-party complaint against town, and plan commission and town moved to dismiss counterclaim and complaint.
The Superior Court granted motion. Property owner appealed.
The Court of Appeals held that:
- Dismissal of owner’s claim for declaratory judgment that pond on his property was not subject to regulation by municipal ordinance was improper;
- Owner pleaded sufficient operative facts to support claim that he was entitled to preliminary injunction;
- Owner pleaded sufficient operative facts to support promissory estoppel claim; and
- Owner pleaded insufficient operative facts to support inverse condemnation claim.