Yunker v. Means
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolman, J.
Plaintiffs and defendants were adjacent property owners with abutting back yards. Plaintiffs brought this suit under ORS 215.185 ① to compel defendants to remove a second story deck at the back of defendants’ house. Plaintiffs alleged that the deck violated the setback line requirements imposed by the county’s zoning ordinances. Defendants appeal from a decree for plaintiffs.
The county’s ordinances required a minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet except for “detached” acces sory buildings, in which case only a 2% foot setback was required. An accessory building was defined as “a subordinate…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Frankland v. City of Lake OswegoOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Misuk v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
- Carney v. City of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1952
3Cited by8 opinions
- Town of Union v. StrongSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Davidson v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning AdjustmentDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Geoffrey S. Stiff v. Town of BelgradeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2024
- Wall Street Management & Capital, Inc. v. CritesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Friends of Yamhill County v. Yamhill CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.