Lawrence v. Clackamas County

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that, under ORS 215.130(5), a person is entitled to “continue a nonconforming use of land, so long as that use was lawful before a change in zoning made that use nonconforming”
• stating issue preclusion factors as including identity of issues and existence of a decision on a necessary determination in the prior proceeding

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Aguilar v. Washington County
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2005-09-28· cited 16×
• VanSpeybroeck v. Tillamook County
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2008-08-13· cited 13×
• Grabhorn v. Washington County
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-06-29· cited 4×
• Scott Inc. v. City of Ontario
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-12-29· cited 3×
• Waste Not of Yamhill County v. Yamhill County
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-07-15· cited 2×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Drews v. EBI Companies
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1990-07-11· cited 214×
• Nelson v. Emerald People's Utility District
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1993-12-09· cited 202×
• Lawrence v. Clackamas County
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-12-22· cited 6×