Labor v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd., Del.Super., 297 A.2d 412 (1972). 8 . See Janaman v. New Castle County Bd. of Adjustment, Del.Super., 364 A.2d 1241 (1976); see also Mellow v. Board of Adjustment, Del.Super., 565 A.2d 947, 954 (1988), aff'd, 236 N.J.Super. 227, 565 A.2d 422 (1989). 9 . Mellow, 565 A.2d at 947. 10 . See Mettler v. Board of Adjustment, Del.Super., C.A. No. 91A-02-3-1-AP, Gebelein, L, 1991 WL 190488 (Aug. 21, 1991). 11 . See Johnson v. Chrysler Corp., Del.Supr., 213 A.2d 64, 66-67(1965). 12 . See Petrucelli v. New Castle County Bd. of Adjustment, Del.Super., C.A.. No. 97A-02-009, Quillen, J., 1997 WL 817891 (Dec. 2, 1997) (Let. Op. and Order). 13 . SeeDEp'TDEC. ofAug. 12, 1996. (Emphasis added). 14 . See Shellbume, Inc. v. Roberts, Del.Supr., 224 A.2d 250, 254 (1966) (<HOLDING>). 15 . The doctrine states that where a law
holding the acquisition of vested rights requires the issuance of a permit and some substantial expenditure obligation or change in relation to the land recognizing a presumption that the issuance of a permit by the state engineer allowing recognized irrigation water rights to be shifted to other users works as severance of those water rights from the land holding that the power to produce a change in a given legal relation may exist irrespective of the consent or knowledge either of the one subject to it or of the one holding it holding that one million dollars in expenditures and a valid building permit did not create vested right in previous zoning classification of the land at issue recognizing that conditions placed on the issuance of a permit do not necessarily diminish or eliminate the definitiveness of the order approving the permit