Legal Opinion

Conner v. City of Seattle

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 21, 2009No. 62563-2-IPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*678¶1 William and Marilyn Conner purchased a designated historical landmark property in West Seattle known as the Satterlee House. The Landmarks Preservation Board rejected their proposal to develop the site because it did not preserve the protected historic features. The hearing examiner and the superior court upheld the board’s decision.

Ellington, J.

¶2 The Conners’ principal contention is that the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance1 is unconstitutionally vague as applied. They also contend the landmark restrictions on the property constitute an unlawful tax and a regulatory taking, and deprived…

2Cases cited32 opinions

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
Department of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & GwinnWashington Supreme Court · 2002
Robinson v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by1 opinion

Conner v. City of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009