Opinion ID: 2265565
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Standing of the Plaintiffs in Coombs v. Town of Ogunquit

Text: As we stated recently in Ricci v. Superintendent, Bureau of Banking, 485 A.2d 645, 647 (Me.1984), [s]tanding of a party to maintain a legal action is a `threshold issue' and our courts are only open to those who meet this basic requirement. On appeal we will address questions of standing even if the parties have not raised the issue in the Superior Court. Franklin Property Trust v. Foresite, Inc., 438 A.2d 218, 220 (Me.1981); Nichols v. City of Rockland, 324 A.2d 295, 296 (Me.1974). To have standing to challenge a municipality's land use regulations, a party must possess sufficient title, right or interest in the land to confer upon him lawful power to use it or to control its use. Walsh v. City of Brewer, 315 A.2d 200, 207 (Me.1974). In the case at bar, the affidavits before this court demonstrate that plaintiffs in Coombs v. Town of Ogunquit lack any legal interest in the property that they sought to develop. The Coombses do not own the site of their proposed motel, although they did for a time have an irrevocable option to purchase the parcel. That option expired on February 1, 1984, and the Coombses' complaint was not filed until February 17. On that latter date, and at all times since, the Coombses have had no interest in the land adequate to give them standing. Consequently, the action brought by the Coombses against the Town must be dismissed.