Legal Opinion
Lauer v. Pierce County
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided September 8, 2010No. 38321-7-IIPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtVan Deren, J.
f 1 A Pierce County hearing examiner granted Mike and Shima Garrison’s application for a fish and wildlife variance, enabling them to proceed with construction of their house within a stream buffer zone on their property. Neighbors Louise Lauer and Darrell de Tienne (collectively Lauer) filed a petition under the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA)1 in superior court, which reversed the hearing examiner’s decision. The Garrisons ask us to reverse the superior court’s decision and remand for reinstatement of the hearing examiner’s decision,2 asserting that the LUPA petition was untimely and that…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- In re the Personal Restraint of IsadoreWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- In Re IsadoreWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- HJS Development, Inc. v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2003
- Watch v. Skagit CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- West Main Associates v. City of BellevueWashington Supreme Court · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Lauer v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2011
- Kitsap Alliance of Property Owners v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- Graham Neighborhood Ass'n v. F.G. AssociatesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- Graham Neighborhood Ass'n v. Fg Assoc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- Kitsap Alliance v. Cent. Puget Sound GrowthCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.