Miller v. City of Monona

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-City officials’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that defendants violated plaintiff-property owner’s class-of-one equal protection rights by making unreasonable demands as part of plaintiff’s efforts to obtain defendants’ approval to construct condominium project. While plaintiff argued that defendant intentionally treated him differently than other property owners, condition of plaintiff’s property that required multiple rounds of asbestos removal precluded plaintiff from establishing existence of similarly-situated comparator. Moreover, existence of said problems provided defendants with rational basis that justified failure to give timely approval for plaintiff to proceed with construction project.