Legal Opinion
Yamhill County v. Ludwick
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided May 3, 1983No. LUBA 80-154; 80-155 (Consolidated); CA A21985; SC 28828PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
These consolidated cases 1 involve conditional use permits and variances granted by Yamhill County to Doug Ingram, the owner of a 4.7 acre tract, and to William Long, the owner of a five acre tract. The permits and variances would allow the owners to construct single family dwellings on the tracts in the area which was designated in the acknowledged Yamhill County Comprehensive Plan as commercial forest and zoned F-40 (Forest-40 acre minimum).
Ludwick and Moorhead, the petitioners on review here, are members of a neighboring homeowners association which maintains a public road that provides…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Marriott Financial Services, Inc. v. Capitol Funds, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Benton County v. Friends of Benton CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- Kirchen v. RemengaMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- Board of County Com'rs of Pitkin County v. PfeiferSupreme Court of Colorado · 1976
- Northern Ind. Pub. Serv. Co. v. McCOY ET UX.Indiana Supreme Court · 1959
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clark v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Gage v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Jefferson Landfill Committee v. Marion CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- Cope v. City of Cannon BeachCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Friends of Yamhill County v. Yamhill CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.