What was the key reason the court found against the resident's claim about the new park?

The court found against the resident's claim regarding the new park primarily because due diligence could have revealed the facts earlier. This indicates that the resident had an opportunity to discover necessary information about the park but failed to act in a timely and responsible manner. Reasonable diligence typically refers to the actions that a prudent person would take under similar circumstances to investigate or gather relevant information. In this scenario, the court likely concluded that the resident's lack of timely inquiry undermined their claim, suggesting that the outcome could have been different had they been more proactive in seeking out information about the park before filing the claim.

This emphasizes the importance of being attentive and responsive in legal matters, as failing to conduct due diligence can significantly impact a party's ability to successfully pursue a claim. The concept of due diligence serves to promote accountability and encourages parties to not only be aware of their rights but also to actively seek out necessary information that could affect their legal positions.