Legal Opinion
Gruner v. Lane County
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided May 24, 1989No. 16-87-10179; CA A49120PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.
Plaintiffs appeal the dismissal with prejudice of their claim for relief for inverse condemnation. Or Const, Art I, § 18. The sole issue is whether their first amended complaint alleges facts sufficient to state a claim. We affirm.
Plaintiffs Gruner, as lessor, and plaintiff Jeremiah, as lessee, of a rock quarry, brought this action against the county to recover damages for an alleged taking of plaintiffs’ property by adoption of a county ordinance reducing the load limit from 40 tons to 17 tons on two county roads that provide access to the quarry. Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges:
“As a direct…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Brennen v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1979
- Fifth Avenue Corp. v. WASHINGTON COUNTY, ETC.Oregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Suess Builders Co. v. City of BeavertonOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- Lincoln Loan Co. v. State, State Highway Com'nOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Douglas County v. BriggsOregon Supreme Court · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Glubka v. LongCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Woods v. First American Title Insurance Co. of Oregon, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
- Deupree v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- Foster Group, Inc. v. City of ElginCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
- Benson v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.