Legal Opinion
Lane County v. Bessett
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided May 27, 1980No. 781643, 781644 CA 13859, 13860PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
The principal issue in these consolidated appeals is whether Mobile Crushing Co. (Mobile), the owner of a 171 acre parcel located in a farm-forestry zone (FF-20) in Lane County, has a right to operate a rock quarry on the property as a nonconforming use because quarry operations were conducted on the property by the United States Government, Mobile’s predecessor in title.
The United States acquired the property in 1962 as a quarry site for the Army Corps of Engineers. The rock obtained from the quarry was used by the Corps in connection with the construction of Fall Creek Dam. The dam…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Artman v. RayOregon Supreme Court · 1972
- Lane County v. R. A. Heintz Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961
- Clackamas County v. HolmesOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Bither v. Baker Rock Crushing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1968
- Bither v. Baker Rock Crushing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Polk County v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- Durkin v. Board of Appeals of FalmouthMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
- Tigard Sand and Gravel, Inc. v. Clackamas CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Elliott v. Oregon International Mining Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
- Polk County v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.