The lower court had ruled that the Plaintiffs, in this case Mr. Key, his wife and the Trust, had no standing. The Supreme Court reversed finding that “…the plaintiffs allege that Brown omitted material elements of its construction project from its IMP, thereby depriving the CPC of an opportunity to review “the true project.” As a consequence, the plaintiffs further contend, “[n]o public forums were held with respect to the [field] hockey field location, design and amenities prior to the submission or approval of the [IMP], as required.” As abutting property owners, the plaintiffs have clearly established an injury in fact.”
Accordingly, the Rhode Island Supreme Court vacated the lower court’s finding and remanded as to Count 1 of the Amended Complaint. See full opinion at: Key, et. als v. Brown University, et. als.