Home/Court of Appeals of Oregon/Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego

Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego

493 P.2d 163, 8 Or. App. 224, 1972 Ore. App. LEXIS 1068
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedJanuary 28, 1972
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 493 P.2d 163 (Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego, 493 P.2d 163, 8 Or. App. 224, 1972 Ore. App. LEXIS 1068 (Or. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinion

LANGTRY, J.

This appeal is from a decree which dismissed with prejudice the plaintiffs’ suit for declaratory judgment, injunction, and, alternatively, damages. The motion to dismiss came at the conclusion of plaintiffs’ case. Defendants sought to reserve the right to put on a case and there was a colloquy between court and counsel on this subject, but no decision.

Evidence or stipulations show all of the plaintiffs are property owners — principally home owners — who *227 assert their rights under zoning ordinances were infringed by the concerted action of the defendants in bringing about a change in the residential zone of an adjacent tract of land ① to one which allowed construction of a four and five-story apartment building.

In 1967 various entities in which Carl Iialvorson had a dominant interest acquired the right to purchase the property designated (B) and (C) in the accompanying maps (hereinafter the Kerr property). The segment of the Kerr property around which this suit revolves is in Multnomah County and lies immediately north of the east-west Clackamas-Multnomah County line and is designated (B) on the maps. It is separated by a dotted line from the balance of the Kerr property (marked (C)) on the accompanying maps. This land was undeveloped. Plaintiffs live or own property on the strip of land immediately west of (B), extending southward from Stephenson Street; this area is designated (A) on the maps (hereinafter called Arrowood). Arrowood was substantially developed with single family residences. Immediately east of (B) is other land, not involved here, which also was developed with single family residences.

Prior to the events which led to this litigation all of the land mentioned above which lay in Multnomah County had been zoned under a comprehensive plan as R-20 — single family residential — upon which residences could be built only if the lot occupied an area of 20,000 square feet or more. ② Arrowood had been

*228

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Atwood v. City of Portland
637 P.2d 1302 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1981)
Neuberger v. City of Portland
586 P.2d 351 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1978)
Marion County Fire District 1 v. Marion-Polk County Boundary Commission
526 P.2d 1031 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1974)
West v. City of Astoria
524 P.2d 1216 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1974)
Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego
517 P.2d 1042 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1973)
Multnomah County v. Howell
496 P.2d 235 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
493 P.2d 163, 8 Or. App. 224, 1972 Ore. App. LEXIS 1068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frankland-v-city-of-lake-oswego-orctapp-1972.