In Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000), the United States Supreme Court held that the plaintiff property owner had stated an equal protection claim in alleging that a municipality had "irrationally and wholly arbitrarily" refused to connect the plaintiff's property to the city's water system unless plaintiff agreed to grant the city a thirty-three foot easement to install and maintain the connection rather than the fifteen foot easement required of other similarly situated residents. Id. at 565. The Court affirmed the plaintiff's right to bring an equal protection claim as a "'class of one,' where the plaintiff alleges that she has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment." Id. at 564. In a separate concurrence, Justice Breyer cautioned that because zoning decisions will "almost always treat one landowner differently from another," it is the presence of evidence of "vindictive action," "illegitimate animus," or "ill will" that will distinguish "run-of-the-mill zoning cases" from "cases of constitutional right." Id. at 565- 66 (Breyer, J., concurring).