Young v. Pierce County
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtSeinfeld, J.
— Thomas J. and Carolyn L. Young appeal a Pierce County (County) land use ruling that applied wetland regulations to an “area” of their property and denied them an agricultural exemption. They contend that (1) the word “area” is unconstitutionally vague; (2) the County failed to show that the property is a wetland or is otherwise subject to regulation; (3) if wetland regulations *179apply, the evidence established the agricultural exception; and (4) the County’s notice of violation was inadequate. We affirm.
FACTS
The Youngs purchased 25 acres in Pierce County in February 2000. Previous owners had…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited25 opinions
- City of Spokane v. DouglassWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- Hollis v. Garwall, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1999
- In Re RosierWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1997
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Cingular Wireless, LLC v. Thurston CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Griffin v. Thurston CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- Griffin v. Thurston County Board of HealthCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- East County Reclamation Co. v. BjornsenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
- East County Reclamation Co. v. BjornsenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.