CRAVEN v. JACKSON COUNTY

LUBA 88-023; CA A49322; SC S35826.

779 P.2d 1011 (1989)

308 Or. 281

William J. CRAVEN, Petitioner On Review, v. JACKSON COUNTY and U. Andrew Samad, Respondents On Review.

Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc.

Decided August 29, 1989.

Reconsideration Denied October 26, 1989.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Sandra Smith Gangle, Salem, argued the cause, for petitioner on review. With her on the petition was Depenbrock, Gangle & Naucler, Salem.

E.R. Bashaw, County Counsel, Medford, argued the cause, for respondent on review Jackson County. With him on the response was Wendie L. Kellington, Asst. County Counsel, Medford.

U. Andrew Samad, Ashland, argued the cause and filed the response to the petition, pro se.

Michael D. Reynolds, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, argued the cause, for intervenor Dept. of Land Conservation and Development. With him on the response were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., and Virginia L. Linder, Sol. Gen., Salem.


FADELEY, Justice.

We are asked to decide whether Respondent Samad's proposed winery and related retail activity are lawful conditional uses in an exclusive farm use (EFU) zone under ORS 215.283(2)(a).1 The question is whether the proposed uses are "commercial activities that are in conjunction with farm use."

Samad proposes to build a winery and retail tasting room in conjunction with...

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