Stevens v. City of Cannon Beach
This text of 106 F.3d 409 (Stevens v. City of Cannon Beach) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
106 F.3d 409
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Irving C. STEVENS; Jeanette E. Stevens, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
CITY OF CANNON BEACH; State of Oregon, Acting by & through
its Department of Parks & Recreation, Division of State
Lands, Land Conservation & Development Commission & Judicial
Department, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 95-35837.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Jan. 9, 1997.
Decided Jan. 17, 1997.
Before: ALDISERT,* PREGERSON, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
ORDER**
We affirm for the reasons set forth in the well-written, well-reasoned opinion of the district court published at 893 F.Supp. 944 (D.Or.1995).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
106 F.3d 409, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 25804, 1997 WL 22418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-city-of-cannon-beach-ca9-1997.