1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 31 P.3d
  5. 31 P.3d 458 (2001)
 

FOUNTAIN VILLAGE DEV. v. MULTNOMAH CTY.

2000-051; A112829

31 P.3d 458 (2001)

176 Or. App. 213

FOUNTAIN VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Petitioner-Cross-Respondent, v. MULTNOMAH COUNTY, Respondent-Cross-Petitioner, and Arnold Rochlin, Respondent-Cross-Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided August 22, 2001.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Phillip E. Grillo, Christopher D. Crean and Miller Nash LLP, Portland, filed the briefs for petitioner-cross-respondent.

Sandra N. Duffy and Thomas Sponsler, Albany, NY, filed the brief for respondent-cross-petitioner Multnomah County.

Arnold Rochlin pro se filed the brief for respondent-cross-respondent Arnold Rochlin.

Before HASELTON, Presiding Judge, and LINDER and WOLLHEIM, Judges.

HASELTON, P.J.

Petitioner, Fountain Village Development Company, petitions for review of a final opinion and order of the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), determining that Fountain Village had lost an alleged vested right to complete and use a log cabin on land zoned for commercial forest use. Respondent, cross-petitioner Multnomah County, does not challenge LUBA's determination of the vested rights issue but, by way of a "conditional

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