Foland v. Jackson County

807 P.2d 801 (1991)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Foland v. Jackson County

Oregon Supreme Court
807 P.2d 801 (1991)

  • Written by Robert Cane, JD

Facts

The Oregon legislature enacted several statutes that created the Comprehensive Land Use Planning Coordination program (program). The legislature also created the Land Conservation and Development Commission (commission) with duties and powers to administer the program. The commission had a duty to adopt state-wide land-use-planning goals. The program required that all Oregon cities and counties conduct land-use planning in accordance with the commission’s goals. The relevant statutes required each city and county to adopt a comprehensive plan that complied with the commission’s goals for land-use decisions. Pursuant to the statutes, if the commission acknowledged that a comprehensive plan complied with the commission’s goals, the city or county needed to make land-use decisions in compliance only with its comprehensive plan rather than directly with the commission’s goals. A city or county with an acknowledged plan had an ongoing duty to periodically review its comprehensive plan. If necessary, a city or county had a duty to amend and revise its plan to comply with the commission’s goals. The commission also had a duty to review acknowledged plans periodically to ensure continuing compliance with the commission’s goals and to require amendment if a plan did not comply. An amendment to a previously acknowledged plan would be automatically acknowledged if no person filed a notice of intent to appeal within 21 days from the date that notice of the amendment was mailed to any person who was entitled to notice. Any person who had participated in the proceeding to amend a plan was entitled to notice and could appeal the decision to adopt an amendment. An amendment subject to a timely appeal could not be acknowledged until the appeal was resolved.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Van Hoomissen, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership