Murphy v. S. A. Hutchins & Associates Construction Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBryson, J.
Plaintiffs filed this declaratory proceeding to determine whether defendant had violated a zoning ordinance of the city of Roseburg by collocating and connecting two single-family dwellings on a residential lot in Roseburg, Oregon. Plaintiffs reside near the defendant’s structure and sought an order to remove one of defendant’s homes. The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding that defendant’s structure was a satisfactory “two family dwelling” within the terms of the ordinance. Plaintiffs appeal, assigning as error the dismissal of their complaint.
It appeared at the hearing that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lane County v. R. A. Heintz Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961
- Milwaukie Co. of Jehovah's Witnesses v. MullenOregon Supreme Court · 1958
- H. W. Robinson Carpet Co. v. FletcherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
3Cited by7 opinions
- Frankland v. City of Lake OswegoOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Whistler v. Burlington Northern RailroadMontana Supreme Court · 1987
- League To Save Lake Tahoe v. Crystal EnterprisesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- League to Save Lake Tahoe v. Crystal EnterprisesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Frankland v. City of Lake OswegoOregon Supreme Court · 1973
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.