Legal Opinion
Oregon State Homebuilders Ass'n v. City of Tigard
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided December 24, 1979No. 37-834, CA 12304PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtButtler, P. J.
The City of Tigard appeals the decree of the trial court declaring that the City’s Ordinance No. 77-26, as amended, is unconstitutional in that it violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We reverse.
On March 11, 1977, the City passed Ordinance No. 77-26, 1 imposing what it characterized as "a system development charge [SDC] * * * to implement the installation, construction and extension of extra-capacity street facilities and traffic control devices * * The ordinance states that the charge shall be made "to properties which create additional needs for those…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- City of New Orleans v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Davis v. Whiting Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- Marquam Investment Corp. v. BeersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
- City of Portland v. LedwidgeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
- Vail v. City of BandonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
- Robert Randall Co. v. City of BeavertonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984