Speckhardt v. Croft Trailer & Hitch Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting county’s concern that determination about nonconforming-use status of Grabhorn’s composting operation “required the exercise of discretion and must be done in the context of a current application for a nonconforming use determination, not by analysis of a LUCS” (footnote omitted)
• dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction a declaratory judgment action “as either an improper appeal [of a land use decision] or an improper request for an initial land use decision from the trial court that would override the county’s” decision on the same subject
• “Any analysis under ORS 197.015 must begin by identifying the ‘final decision or determination made by a local government’ at issue.”
• “Any analysis under ORS 197.015 must begin by identifying the ‘final decision or determination made by a local government’ at issue.”
• “A local government’s denial of a requested declaration of rights based on an interpretation of its land use regulations is a ‘land use decision’ under ORS 197.015(10).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).