Legal Opinion

Conte v. City of Eugene

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 5, 2018No. A166896Published

1Opinion of the CourtDeVORE, P.J.

*627Petitioner seeks judicial review after the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) denied her motion to intervene in an appeal of the City of Eugene's approval of a development application. LUBA ruled that petitioner had not "appeared" before the city during the proceedings on the application and therefore was not entitled to intervene *495before LUBA. See ORS 197.830(7)(b) (limiting "[p]ersons who may intervene" to the applicant and "[p]ersons who appeared before the local government, special district or state agency, orally or in writing"). On judicial review, petitioner argues that she "appeared" in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Warren v. Lane CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Trautman v. City of EugeneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  4. Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of EugeneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  5. Century Properties, LLC v. City of CorvallisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API