Legal Opinion

Sleasman v. City of Lacey

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided July 26, 2005No. 31775-3-IIPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*619¶1 Stephen and Barbara Sleasman appeal the superior court’s denial of their Land Use Petition Act (LUPA)1 petition and affirmance of the city of Lacey’s monetary sanction for removing 18 trees from their property without a permit. They argue the sanction was improper because (1) the ordinance under which the City imposed the sanction was unconstitutionally vague, (2) the ordinance violated their due process rights as applied, (3) their tree removal was exempt from the ordinance’s application, and (4) the amount of the sanction was too high. The City cross-appeals, arguing that the trial court…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Erection Co. v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Chelan County v. NykreimWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Chelan County v. NykreimWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Citizens To Preserve Pioneer Park, L.L.C. v. City of Mercer IslandCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
  5. PIONEER PARK v. Mercer IslandCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Sleasman v. City of LaceyWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Sleasman v. City of LaceyWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Reeves v. City of WenatcheeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  4. Reeves v. City of WenatcheeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API