Legal Opinion

Sayler v. City of Durham

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 25, 1983No. 41-852; CA A22772PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, J.

Defendant City appeals from a summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs, finding that the City lacks standing to enforce a “Buffer and Landscape Easement” contained in the recorded plat of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) approved by the City. We reverse.

Most of the facts are undisputed. A land developer applied to the City for approval of a PUD. The City gave preliminary approval subject to a number of conditions, including that the PUD contain a 40-foot wide buffer area of natural vegetation between one side of the PUD and Boones Ferry Road. The developer complied with this condition by…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dippold v. Cathlamet Timber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Frankland v. City of Lake OswegoOregon Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Lane County v. Oregon Builders, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  4. Montmore Homeowners Ass'n v. BrydonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Village of Los Ranchos De Albuquerque v. ShiveleyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. EachusCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API