Court Opinion

ID: 9793430
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:47:26.754778+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:04:58.280958
License: Public Domain

Mr. Chief Justice Knauss
concurring:
I concur in the foregoing opinion and desire to state *271the following as an additional reason for affirmance of the trial court’s judgment: The City and County of Denver and John D. McLucas, later succeeded by J. D. Are-hart, entered this proceeding for the first time when the complaint herein was filed. The parties before the Board of Adjustment were Redding-Miller and any persons who objected to the variance which that board granted. In Board of Adjustment v. Kuehn, 132 Colo. 348, 290 P. (2d) 1114, we held that the Board of Adjustment could not appeal a judgment of the district court reviewing its decision. McLucas, appointed under an ordinance, is clearly an employee of the Board of Adjustment and in no position to prosecute an appeal from the decision of his superior, the Board of Adjustment. The latter is a creature of the Denver Charter and the Administrative officer appointed pursuant to an ordinance is in no better position to prosecute an appeal than would the administrative officer of this court in taking a decision of this court to the Supreme Court of the United States.