1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.2d
  4. 626 P.2d
  5. 626 P.2d 376 (1981)
 

JAKOB v. DUNES CITY

No. 80-032; CA 19061.

626 P.2d 376 (1981)

51 Or.App. 505

Martha JAKOB and Lane County, Petitioners-Cross-Respondents, v. DUNES CITY, Respondent-Cross-Petitioner, Land Conservation and Development Commission, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Motion to Dismiss Cross-Petition November 17, 1980.

Argued and Submitted January 26, 1981.

Decided April 6, 1981.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Allen L. Johnson, Eugene, argued the cause for petitioner-cross-respondent, Martha Jakob. On the brief were Lombard, Gardner, Honsowetz & Brewer, and Jack A. Gardner, Eugene, and Dana A. Anderson, Asst. County Counsel, Eugene, for petitioner-cross-respondent, Lane County and for petitioner-cross-respondent, Martha Jakob.

William Van Vactor, Lane County Counsel, Eugene, argued the cause for petitioner-cross-respondent, Lane County.

Dwight Ronald Gerber, Florence, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent-cross-petitioner, Dunes City.

Mary Deits, Asst. Atty. Gen., argued the cause for respondent, LCDC. With her on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., John R. McCulloch, Jr., Sol. Gen., and William F. Gary, Deputy Sol. Gen., Salem.

No appearance for respondent Land Use Board of Appeals.

Before GILLETTE, P.J., and RICHARDSON and YOUNG, JJ.

On Petitioner Lane County's, Motion for Expedited Consideration October 14, 1980, and on Petitioner Martha Jakob's, motion to Dismiss Cross-Petition November 17, 1980.

GILLETTE, Presiding Judge.

Petitioners seek review of an order entered by the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), which purports to invalidate a Lane County ordinance rezoning petitioner Jakob's land on the ground that the rezoning violates Statewide Planning Goal 17. Respondent Dunes City cross...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases