Legal Opinion

Save Our Scenic Area v. Skamania County

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 11, 2015No. 90398-1PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

¶1 This case involves whether the plaintiffs’ claims under the Growth Management Act (GMA), chapter 36.70A RCW, and Planning Enabling Act of the State of Washington (PEA), chapter 36.70 RCW, were properly dismissed as time barred.1 The trial court granted the defendant-county’s summary judgment motion on each of the plaintiffs’ claims, but the Court of Appeals reversed on the GMA and PEA claims, reasoning that a genuine issue of fact remained as to (1) whether Skamania County actually completed periodic review on August 2, 2005, which Skamania County argues triggered the clock for the GMA…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Quadrant Corp. v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Quadrant Corp. v. STATE, GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BD.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Woods v. Kittitas CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Woods v. Kittitas CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Thurston County v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2008

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City Of Puyallup, V Pierce County,et AlCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  2. Columbia Riverkeeper v. Port of Vancouver USAWashington Supreme Court · 2017
  3. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Okanogan CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021
  4. Fall City Sustainable Growth, V. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2025
  5. Seven Hills, LLC v. Chelan CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2021

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

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

Powered by the Exa API