Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830 (2026)

Review procedures; standing; fees; deadlines; rules; issues subject to review; attorney fees and costs; publication of orders; mediation; tracking of reviews

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      197.830 Review procedures; standing; fees; deadlines; rules; issues subject to review; attorney fees and costs; publication of orders; mediation; tracking of reviews. (1) Review of land use decisions or limited land use decisions under ORS 197.830 to 197.845 shall be commenced by filing a notice of intent to appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals.

      (2) Except as provided in ORS 197.620, a person may petition the board for review of a land use decision or limited land use decision if the person:

      (a) Filed a notice of intent to appeal the decision as provided in subsection (1) of this section; and

      (b) Appeared before the local government, special district or state agency orally or in writing.

      (3) If a local government makes a land use decision without providing a hearing, except as provided under ORS 197A.140 (2), 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10), or the local government makes a land use decision that is different from the proposal described in the notice of hearing to such a degree that the notice of the proposed action did not reasonably describe the local government’s final actions, a person adversely affected by the decision may appeal the decision to the board under this section:

      (a) Within 21 days of actual notice where notice is required; or

      (b) Within 21 days of the date a person knew or should have known of the decision where no notice is required.

      (4) If a local government makes a land use decision without a hearing pursuant to ORS 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10):

      (a) A person who was not provided notice of the decision as required under ORS 215.416 (11)(c) or 227.175 (10)(c) may appeal the decision to the board under this section within 21 days of receiving actual notice of the decision.

      (b) A person who is not entitled to notice under ORS 215.416 (11)(c) or 227.175 (10)(c) but who is adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision may appeal the decision to the board under this section within 21 days after the expiration of the period for filing a local appeal of the decision established by the local government under ORS 215.416 (11)(a) or 227.175 (10)(a).

      (c) A person who receives notice of a decision made without a hearing under ORS 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10) may appeal the decision to the board under this section within 21 days of receiving actual notice of the nature of the decision, if the notice of the decision did not reasonably describe the nature of the decision.

      (d) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection, a person who receives notice of a decision made without a hearing under ORS 197A.140 (2), 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10) may not appeal the decision to the board under this section.

      (5) If a local government makes a limited land use decision which is different from the proposal described in the notice to such a degree that the notice of the proposed action did not reasonably describe the local government’s final actions, a person adversely affected by the decision may appeal the decision to the board under this section:

      (a) Within 21 days of actual notice where notice is required; or

      (b) Within 21 days of the date a person knew or should have known of the decision where no notice is required.

      (6) The appeal periods described in subsections (3), (4) and (5) of this section:

      (a) May not exceed three years after the date of the decision, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection.

      (b) May not exceed 10 years after the date of the decision if notice of a hearing or an administrative decision made pursuant to ORS 197.195, 197.797 or 197A.146 is required but has not been provided.

      (7)(a) Within 21 days after a notice of intent to appeal has been filed with the board under subsection (1) of this section, any person described in paragraph (b) of this subsection may intervene in and be made a party to the review proceeding by filing a motion to intervene and by paying a filing fee of $200.

      (b) Persons who may intervene in and be made a party to the review proceedings, as set forth in subsection (1) of this section, are:

      (A) The applicant who initiated the action before the local government, special district or state agency; or

      (B) Persons who appeared before the local government, special district or state agency, orally or in writing.

      (c) Failure to comply with the deadline or to pay the filing fee set forth in paragraph (a) of this subsection shall result in denial of a motion to intervene.

      (8) If a state agency whose order, rule, ruling, policy or other action is at issue is not a party to the proceeding, it may file a brief with the board as if it were a party. The brief shall be due on the same date the respondent’s brief is due and shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $100.

      (9) A notice of intent to appeal a land use decision or limited land use decision shall be filed not later than 21 days after the date the decision sought to be reviewed becomes final. A notice of intent to appeal plan and land use regulation amendments processed pursuant to ORS 197.610 to 197.625 shall be filed not later than 21 days after notice of the decision sought to be reviewed is mailed or otherwise submitted to parties entitled to notice under ORS 197.615. Failure to include a statement identifying when, how and to whom notice was provided under ORS 197.615 does not render the notice defective. Copies of the notice of intent to appeal shall be served upon the local government, special district or state agency and the applicant of record, if any, in the local government, special district or state agency proceeding. The notice shall be served and filed in the form and manner prescribed by rule of the board and shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $350.

      (10)(a) Within 21 days after service of the notice of intent to appeal, the local government, special district or state agency shall transmit to the board the original or a certified copy of the entire record of the proceeding under review. By stipulation of all parties to the review proceeding the record may be shortened. The board may require or permit subsequent corrections to the record; however, the board shall issue an order on a motion objecting to the record within 60 days of receiving the motion. If the board denies a petitioner’s objection to the record, the board may establish a new deadline for the petition for review to be filed that may not be less than 14 days from the later of the original deadline for the brief or the date of denial of the petitioner’s record objection.

      (b) Within 10 days after service of a notice of intent to appeal, the board shall provide notice to the petitioner and the respondent of their option to enter into mediation pursuant to ORS 197.860. Any person moving to intervene shall be provided such notice within seven days after a motion to intervene is filed. The notice required by this paragraph shall be accompanied by a statement that mediation information or assistance may be obtained from the Department of Land Conservation and Development.

      (11) A petition for review of the land use decision or limited land use decision and supporting brief shall be filed with the board as required by the board under subsection (13) of this section.

      (12) The petition shall include a copy of the decision sought to be reviewed and shall state:

      (a) The facts that establish that the petitioner has standing.

      (b) The date of the decision.

      (c) The issues the petitioner seeks to have reviewed.

      (13)(a) The board shall adopt rules establishing deadlines for filing petitions and briefs and for oral argument.

      (b) The local government or state agency may withdraw its decision for purposes of reconsideration at any time:

      (A) Subsequent to the filing of a notice of intent; and

      (B) Prior to:

      (i) The date set for filing the record; or

      (ii) On appeal of a decision under ORS 197.610 to 197.625 or relating to the development of a residential structure, the filing of the respondent’s brief.

      (c) If a local government or state agency withdraws an order for purposes of reconsideration, it shall, within such time as the board may allow, affirm, modify or reverse its decision. If the petitioner is dissatisfied with the local government or agency action after withdrawal for purposes of reconsideration, the petitioner may refile the notice of intent and the review shall proceed upon the revised order. An amended notice of intent is not required if the local government or state agency, on reconsideration, affirms the order or modifies the order with only minor changes.

      (14) The board shall issue a final order within 77 days after the date of transmittal of the record. If the order is not issued within 77 days the applicant may apply in Marion County or the circuit court of the county where the application was filed for a writ of mandamus to compel the board to issue a final order.

      (15) Upon entry of its final order, the board:

      (a) May, in its discretion, award costs to the prevailing party including the cost of preparation of the record if the prevailing party is the local government, special district or state agency whose decision is under review.

      (b) Shall award reasonable attorney fees and expenses to the prevailing party against any other party who the board finds presented a position or filed any motion without probable cause to believe the position or motion was well-founded in law or on factually supported information.

      (c) Shall award costs and attorney fees to a party as provided in ORS 197.843.

      (16) Orders issued under this section may be enforced in appropriate judicial proceedings.

      (17)(a) The board shall provide for the publication of its orders that are of general public interest in the form it deems best adapted for public convenience. The publications shall constitute the official reports of the board.

      (b) Any moneys collected or received from sales by the board shall be paid into the Board Publications Account established by ORS 197.832.

      (18) Except for any sums collected for publication of board opinions, all fees collected by the board under this section that are not awarded as costs shall be paid over to the State Treasurer to be credited to the General Fund.

      (19) The board shall track and report on its website:

      (a) The number of reviews commenced, as described in subsection (1) of this section, the number of reviews commenced for which a petition is filed under subsection (2) of this section and, in relation to each of those numbers, the rate at which the reviews result in a decision of the board to uphold, reverse or remand the land use decision or limited land use decision. The board shall track and report reviews under this paragraph in categories established by the board.

      (b) A list of petitioners, the number of reviews commenced and the rate at which the petitioner’s reviews have resulted in decisions of the board to uphold, reverse or remand the land use decision or limited land use decision.

      (c) A list of respondents, the number of reviews involving each respondent and the rate at which reviews involving the respondent have resulted in decisions of the board to uphold, reverse or remand the land use decision or limited land use decision. Additionally, when a respondent is the local government that made the land use decision or limited land use decision, the board shall track whether the local government appears before the board.

      (d) A list of reviews, and a brief summary of the circumstances in each review, under which the board exercises its discretion to require a losing party to pay the attorney fees of the prevailing party. [1983 c.827 §31; 1985 c.119 §3; 1987 c.278 §1; 1987 c.729 §16; 1989 c.761 §12; 1991 c.817 §7; 1993 c.143 §1; 1993 c.310 §1; 1995 c.160 §1; 1995 c.595 §3; 1997 c.187 §1; 1997 c.452 §1; 1999 c.255 §2; 1999 c.348 §17; 1999 c.621 §3; 2003 c.791 §28; 2003 c.793 §6; 2009 c.885 §38; 2011 c.280 §9; 2011 c.483 §1; 2013 c.513 §1; 2019 c.221 §1; 2019 c.447 §1; 2021 c.61 §1; 2021 c.385 §3; 2023 c.223 §5; 2025 c.173 §1; 2025 c.330 §4; 2025 c.476 §36]

 

      Note: The amendments to 197.830 by section 4, chapter 330, Oregon Laws 2025, become operative July 1, 2026. See section 6, chapter 330, Oregon Laws 2025. The text that is operative until July 1, 2026, including amendments by section 1, chapter 173, Oregon Laws 2025, and section 36, chapter 476, Oregon Laws 2025, is set forth for the user’s convenience.

 

      197.830. (1) Review of land use decisions or limited land use decisions under ORS 197.830 to 197.845 shall be commenced by filing a notice of intent to appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals.

      (2) Except as provided in ORS 197.620, a person may petition the board for review of a land use decision or limited land use decision if the person:

      (a) Filed a notice of intent to appeal the decision as provided in subsection (1) of this section; and

      (b) Appeared before the local government, special district or state agency orally or in writing.

      (3) If a local government makes a land use decision without providing a hearing, except as provided under ORS 197A.140 (2), 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10), or the local government makes a land use decision that is different from the proposal described in the notice of hearing to such a degree that the notice of the proposed action did not reasonably describe the local government’s final actions, a person adversely affected by the decision may appeal the decision to the board under this section:

      (a) Within 21 days of actual notice where notice is required; or

      (b) Within 21 days of the date a person knew or should have known of the decision where no notice is required.

      (4) If a local government makes a land use decision without a hearing pursuant to ORS 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10):

      (a) A person who was not provided notice of the decision as required under ORS 215.416 (11)(c) or 227.175 (10)(c) may appeal the decision to the board under this section within 21 days of receiving actual notice of the decision.

      (b) A person who is not entitled to notice under ORS 215.416 (11)(c) or 227.175 (10)(c) but who is adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision may appeal the decision to the board under this section within 21 days after the expiration of the period for filing a local appeal of the decision established by the local government under ORS 215.416 (11)(a) or 227.175 (10)(a).

      (c) A person who receives notice of a decision made without a hearing under ORS 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10) may appeal the decision to the board under this section within 21 days of receiving actual notice of the nature of the decision, if the notice of the decision did not reasonably describe the nature of the decision.

      (d) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection, a person who receives notice of a decision made without a hearing under ORS 197A.140 (2), 215.416 (11) or 227.175 (10) may not appeal the decision to the board under this section.

      (5) If a local government makes a limited land use decision which is different from the proposal described in the notice to such a degree that the notice of the proposed action did not reasonably describe the local government’s final actions, a person adversely affected by the decision may appeal the decision to the board under this section:

      (a) Within 21 days of actual notice where notice is required; or

      (b) Within 21 days of the date a person knew or should have known of the decision where no notice is required.

      (6) The appeal periods described in subsections (3), (4) and (5) of this section:

      (a) May not exceed three years after the date of the decision, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection.

      (b) May not exceed 10 years after the date of the decision if notice of a hearing or an administrative decision made pursuant to ORS 197.195 or 197.797 is required but has not been provided.

      (7)(a) Within 21 days after a notice of intent to appeal has been filed with the board under subsection (1) of this section, any person described in paragraph (b) of this subsection may intervene in and be made a party to the review proceeding by filing a motion to intervene and by paying a filing fee of $200.

      (b) Persons who may intervene in and be made a party to the review proceedings, as set forth in subsection (1) of this section, are:

      (A) The applicant who initiated the action before the local government, special district or state agency; or

      (B) Persons who appeared before the local government, special district or state agency, orally or in writing.

      (c) Failure to comply with the deadline or to pay the filing fee set forth in paragraph (a) of this subsection shall result in denial of a motion to intervene.

      (8) If a state agency whose order, rule, ruling, policy or other action is at issue is not a party to the proceeding, it may file a brief with the board as if it were a party. The brief shall be due on the same date the respondent’s brief is due and shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $100.

      (9) A notice of intent to appeal a land use decision or limited land use decision shall be filed not later than 21 days after the date the decision sought to be reviewed becomes final. A notice of intent to appeal plan and land use regulation amendments processed pursuant to ORS 197.610 to 197.625 shall be filed not later than 21 days after notice of the decision sought to be reviewed is mailed or otherwise submitted to parties entitled to notice under ORS 197.615. Failure to include a statement identifying when, how and to whom notice was provided under ORS 197.615 does not render the notice defective. Copies of the notice of intent to appeal shall be served upon the local government, special district or state agency and the applicant of record, if any, in the local government, special district or state agency proceeding. The notice shall be served and filed in the form and manner prescribed by rule of the board and shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $350.

      (10)(a) Within 21 days after service of the notice of intent to appeal, the local government, special district or state agency shall transmit to the board the original or a certified copy of the entire record of the proceeding under review. By stipulation of all parties to the review proceeding the record may be shortened. The board may require or permit subsequent corrections to the record; however, the board shall issue an order on a motion objecting to the record within 60 days of receiving the motion. If the board denies a petitioner’s objection to the record, the board may establish a new deadline for the petition for review to be filed that may not be less than 14 days from the later of the original deadline for the brief or the date of denial of the petitioner’s record objection.

      (b) Within 10 days after service of a notice of intent to appeal, the board shall provide notice to the petitioner and the respondent of their option to enter into mediation pursuant to ORS 197.860. Any person moving to intervene shall be provided such notice within seven days after a motion to intervene is filed. The notice required by this paragraph shall be accompanied by a statement that mediation information or assistance may be obtained from the Department of Land Conservation and Development.

      (11) A petition for review of the land use decision or limited land use decision and supporting brief shall be filed with the board as required by the board under subsection (13) of this section.

      (12) The petition shall include a copy of the decision sought to be reviewed and shall state:

      (a) The facts that establish that the petitioner has standing.

      (b) The date of the decision.

      (c) The issues the petitioner seeks to have reviewed.

      (13)(a) The board shall adopt rules establishing deadlines for filing petitions and briefs and for oral argument.

      (b) The local government or state agency may withdraw its decision for purposes of reconsideration at any time:

      (A) Subsequent to the filing of a notice of intent; and

      (B) Prior to:

      (i) The date set for filing the record; or

      (ii) On appeal of a decision under ORS 197.610 to 197.625 or relating to the development of a residential structure, the filing of the respondent’s brief.

      (c) If a local government or state agency withdraws an order for purposes of reconsideration, it shall, within such time as the board may allow, affirm, modify or reverse its decision. If the petitioner is dissatisfied with the local government or agency action after withdrawal for purposes of reconsideration, the petitioner may refile the notice of intent and the review shall proceed upon the revised order. An amended notice of intent is not required if the local government or state agency, on reconsideration, affirms the order or modifies the order with only minor changes.

      (14) The board shall issue a final order within 77 days after the date of transmittal of the record. If the order is not issued within 77 days the applicant may apply in Marion County or the circuit court of the county where the application was filed for a writ of mandamus to compel the board to issue a final order.

      (15) Upon entry of its final order, the board:

      (a) May, in its discretion, award costs to the prevailing party including the cost of preparation of the record if the prevailing party is the local government, special district or state agency whose decision is under review.

      (b) Shall award reasonable attorney fees and expenses to the prevailing party against any other party who the board finds presented a position or filed any motion without probable cause to believe the position or motion was well-founded in law or on factually supported information.

      (c) Shall award costs and attorney fees to a party as provided in ORS 197.843.

      (16) Orders issued under this section may be enforced in appropriate judicial proceedings.

      (17)(a) The board shall provide for the publication of its orders that are of general public interest in the form it deems best adapted for public convenience. The publications shall constitute the official reports of the board.

      (b) Any moneys collected or received from sales by the board shall be paid into the Board Publications Account established by ORS 197.832.

      (18) Except for any sums collected for publication of board opinions, all fees collected by the board under this section that are not awarded as costs shall be paid over to the State Treasurer to be credited to the General Fund.

      (19) The board shall track and report on its website:

      (a) The number of reviews commenced, as described in subsection (1) of this section, the number of reviews commenced for which a petition is filed under subsection (2) of this section and, in relation to each of those numbers, the rate at which the reviews result in a decision of the board to uphold, reverse or remand the land use decision or limited land use decision. The board shall track and report reviews under this paragraph in categories established by the board.

      (b) A list of petitioners, the number of reviews commenced and the rate at which the petitioner’s reviews have resulted in decisions of the board to uphold, reverse or remand the land use decision or limited land use decision.

      (c) A list of respondents, the number of reviews involving each respondent and the rate at which reviews involving the respondent have resulted in decisions of the board to uphold, reverse or remand the land use decision or limited land use decision. Additionally, when a respondent is the local government that made the land use decision or limited land use decision, the board shall track whether the local government appears before the board.

      (d) A list of reviews, and a brief summary of the circumstances in each review, under which the board exercises its discretion to require a losing party to pay the attorney fees of the prevailing party.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 160 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Utsey v. Coos Cnty., 32 P.3d 933 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
Utsey v. Coos Cnty., 32 P.3d 933 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 38× “The Lillies do not contest that the League has satisfied the statutory standing requirements of ORS 197.830 and ORS 197.850. They nevertheless contend that statutory standing does not necessarily establish that a claim is constitutionally justiciable and that, in this case,…”
Fechtig v. City of Albany, 946 P.2d 280 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 44× “We believe the above-quoted ‘reasonable lawyer’ approach provides an appropriate starting point for the probable cause analysis required by ORS 197.830-(14)(b). Applying the Broyles definition of probable cause to the case at hand, this Board must make an award of attorney fees…”
Just v. City of Lebanon, 88 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 17× “’ ” Central Klamath County CAT, 41 Or LUBA at 530-33 (emphasis in original; citations and footnotes omitted).”
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 33× “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 110× “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Columbia Riverkeeper v. Clatsop Cnty., 341 P.3d 790 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 40× “Taken together, the two provisions would establish the initial “date set for filing the record” under ORS 197.830 (13)(b) in a case without extensions.”
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 39× “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
Rogue Advocates v. Jackson Cnty., 385 P.3d 1262 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 12× “830(3)(b) is not supported by substantial evidence or substantial reason and, accordingly, reverse and remand to LUBA. Except to the extent discussed below, we reject petitioners’ other challenges to LUBA’s order without further written discussion.”
Johnson v. Landwatch Lane Cnty., 327 Or. App. 485 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 8× “Intervenors Landwatch Lane County and 1000 Friends of Oregon (collectively referred to as Landwatch) petitioned for judicial review of LUBA’s final opinion.”
Wicks-Snodgrass v. City of Reedsport, 939 P.2d 625 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 11× “830(8) (then codified as ORS 197.830(7)) must be read together with the notice requirement in ORS 215.”
Younger v. City of Portland, 752 P.2d 262 (Or. 1988). · cites it 4× “finds: "(a) The order to be unlawful in substance or procedure, but error in procedure shall not be cause for reversal or remand unless the court shall find that substantial rights of the petitioner were prejudiced thereby; "(b) The order to be unconstitutional; or "(c) The…”
Columbia River Television v. Multnomah Cnty., 702 P.2d 1065 (Or. 1985). · cites it 13× “5 *331 LUBA has “* * * exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency in the manner provided in ORS 197.830 to 197.845.” ORS 197.825(1). (Emphasis added.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(1) — 5 cases
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
Billington v. Polk Cnty., 703 P.2d 232 (Or. 1985).
Boise Cascade Corp. v. Bd. of Forestry, 886 P.2d 1033 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
Woodard v. City of Cottage Grove, 201 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(10) — 4 cases
Beck v. City of Tillamook, 831 P.2d 678 (Or. 1992).
Kleikamp v. Bd. of Commissioners of Yamhill Cnty., 455 P.3d 546 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
Hatley v. Umatilla Cnty., 301 P.3d 920 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
Beck v. City of Tillamook, 805 P.2d 144 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(10)(a) — 1 case
Columbia Riverkeeper v. Clatsop Cnty., 341 P.3d 790 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Taken together, the two provisions would establish the initial “date set for filing the record” under ORS 197.830 (13)(b) in a case without extensions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(11) — 8 cases
Younger v. City of Portland, 752 P.2d 262 (Or. 1988). “finds: "(a) The order to be unlawful in substance or procedure, but error in procedure shall not be cause for reversal or remand unless the court shall find that substantial rights of the petitioner were prejudiced thereby; "(b) The order to be unconstitutional; or "(c) The…”
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
Dunn v. City of Redmond, 735 P.2d 609 (Or. 1987).
Ackerley Commc'ns, Inc. v. Multnomah Cnty., 696 P.2d 1140 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
Wright v. KECH-TV, 707 P.2d 1232 (Or. 1985).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(11)(a) — 1 case
East McAndrews Neighborhood Ass'n v. City of Medford, 800 P.2d 308 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(11)(c) — 1 case
Younger v. City of Portland, 752 P.2d 262 (Or. 1988). “finds: "(a) The order to be unlawful in substance or procedure, but error in procedure shall not be cause for reversal or remand unless the court shall find that substantial rights of the petitioner were prejudiced thereby; "(b) The order to be unconstitutional; or "(c) The…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(12) — 2 cases
Perkins v. City of Rajneeshpuram, 686 P.2d 369 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(12)(a) — 1 case
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(13) — 8 cases
Dolan v. City of Tigard, 854 P.2d 437 (Or. 1993).
Dodd v. Hood River Cnty., 855 P.2d 608 (Or. 1993).
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
Larson v. Multnomah Cnty., 859 P.2d 574 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
Schwerdt v. City of Corvallis, 987 P.2d 1243 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(13)(a) — 1 case
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(13)(b) — 5 cases
Columbia Riverkeeper v. Clatsop Cnty., 341 P.3d 790 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Taken together, the two provisions would establish the initial “date set for filing the record” under ORS 197.830 (13)(b) in a case without extensions.”
State ex rel. Oregon Pipeline Co. v. Clatsop Cnty., 288 P.3d 1024 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Dodd v. Hood River Cnty., 836 P.2d 1373 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
Larson v. Multnomah Cnty., 854 P.2d 476 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
Dexter Lost Valley Cmty. Ass'n v. Lane Cnty., 300 P.3d 1243 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(14) — 11 cases
Beck v. City of Tillamook, 831 P.2d 678 (Or. 1992).
VanSpeybroeck v. Tillamook Cnty., 191 P.3d 712 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
Willamette Oaks, LLC v. City of Eugene, 273 P.3d 219 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Root v. Klamath Cnty., 320 P.3d 631 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
Waste Not of Yamhill Cnty. v. Yamhill Cnty., 246 P.3d 493 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(14)(b) — 5 cases
Fechtig v. City of Albany, 946 P.2d 280 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “We believe the above-quoted ‘reasonable lawyer’ approach provides an appropriate starting point for the probable cause analysis required by ORS 197.830-(14)(b). Applying the Broyles definition of probable cause to the case at hand, this Board must make an award of attorney fees…”
Pfeifer v. City of Silverton, 931 P.2d 833 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Bruce v. City of Hillsboro, 977 P.2d 435 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Fechtig v. City of Albany, 946 P.2d 290 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Spencer Creek Neighbors v. Lane Cnty., 952 P.2d 90 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(15) — 1 case
Miller v. City of Dayton, 836 P.2d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(15)(b) — 5 cases
Windlinx Ranch Trust v. Deschutes Cnty., 346 Or. App. 435 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
Windlinx Ranch Trust v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 619 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Windlinx Ranch Trust v. Deschutes Cnty., 346 Or. App. 435 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
Windlinx Ranch Trust v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 619 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Miller v. City of Dayton, 836 P.2d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(2) — 12 cases
Utsey v. Coos Cnty., 32 P.3d 933 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “The Lillies do not contest that the League has satisfied the statutory standing requirements of ORS 197.830 and ORS 197.850. They nevertheless contend that statutory standing does not necessarily establish that a claim is constitutionally justiciable and that, in this case,…”
Just v. City of Lebanon, 88 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “’ ” Central Klamath County CAT, 41 Or LUBA at 530-33 (emphasis in original; citations and footnotes omitted).”
Goose Hollow Foothills League v. City of Portland, 843 P.2d 992 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
Waterwatch of Oregon, Inc. v. Water Resources Comm'n, 88 P.3d 327 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
Friends of Eugene v. City of Eugene, 96 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(2)(a) — 2 cases
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
Woodard v. City of Cottage Grove, 201 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(2)(b) — 4 cases
Friends of Eugene v. City of Eugene, 96 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
East McAndrews Neighborhood Ass'n v. City of Medford, 800 P.2d 308 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(3) — 25 cases
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Flowers v. Klamath Cnty., 780 P.2d 227 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
Tarjoto v. Lane Cnty., 904 P.2d 641 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
Utsey v. Coos Cnty., 32 P.3d 933 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “The Lillies do not contest that the League has satisfied the statutory standing requirements of ORS 197.830 and ORS 197.850. They nevertheless contend that statutory standing does not necessarily establish that a claim is constitutionally justiciable and that, in this case,…”
Just v. City of Lebanon, 88 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “’ ” Central Klamath County CAT, 41 Or LUBA at 530-33 (emphasis in original; citations and footnotes omitted).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(3)(a) — 5 cases
Jaqua v. City of Springfield, 91 P.3d 817 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
Jones v. Douglas Cnty., 270 P.3d 264 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Wilbur Residents v. Douglas Cnty., 950 P.2d 368 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Bigley v. City of Portland, 4 P.3d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
Fechtig v. City of Albany, 882 P.2d 138 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(3)(b) — 5 cases
Rogue Advocates v. Jackson Cnty., 385 P.3d 1262 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “830(3)(b) is not supported by substantial evidence or substantial reason and, accordingly, reverse and remand to LUBA. Except to the extent discussed below, we reject petitioners’ other challenges to LUBA’s order without further written discussion.”
Perkins v. City of Rajneeshpuram, 706 P.2d 949 (Or. 1985).
Orenco Neighborhood Org. v. City of Hillsboro, 899 P.2d 720 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
Lloyd Dist. Cmty. Ass'n v. City of Portland, 916 P.2d 884 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Cutsforth v. City of Albany, 112 P.3d 395 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(3)(c) — 1 case
Flowers v. Klamath Cnty., 780 P.2d 227 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(4) — 2 cases
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Dead Indian Mem'l Road Neighbors v. Jackson Cnty., 72 P.3d 648 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(4)(b) — 3 cases
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Dead Indian Mem'l Road Neighbors v. Jackson Cnty., 72 P.3d 648 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Wilcox v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 107 P.3d 637 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(5) — 2 cases
Hammer v. Clackamas Cnty., 79 P.3d 394 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(5)(a) — 1 case
Hammer v. Clackamas Cnty., 79 P.3d 394 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(5)(b) — 2 cases
Hammer v. Clackamas Cnty., 79 P.3d 394 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(6) — 3 cases
Johnson v. Landwatch Lane Cnty., 327 Or. App. 485 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Intervenors Landwatch Lane County and 1000 Friends of Oregon (collectively referred to as Landwatch) petitioned for judicial review of LUBA’s final opinion.”
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Johnson v. Landwatch Lane Cnty. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(6)(a) — 1 case
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(6)(b) — 2 cases
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Jones v. Douglas Cnty., 270 P.3d 264 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(7) — 16 cases
Columbia River Television v. Multnomah Cnty., 702 P.2d 1065 (Or. 1985). “5 *331 LUBA has “* * * exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency in the manner provided in ORS 197.830 to 197.845.” ORS 197.825(1). (Emphasis added.”
League of Women Voters v. Coos Cnty., 729 P.2d 588 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
Utsey v. Coos Cnty., 32 P.3d 933 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “The Lillies do not contest that the League has satisfied the statutory standing requirements of ORS 197.830 and ORS 197.850. They nevertheless contend that statutory standing does not necessarily establish that a claim is constitutionally justiciable and that, in this case,…”
Towey v. City of Hood River, 516 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “820 to conduct review proceedings upon all filings that comply with provisions of ORS 197.830.” She then asserts, citing ORS 197.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(7)(a) — 1 case
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(7)(b) — 1 case
Conte v. City of Eugene, 425 P.3d 494 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(7)(b)(B) — 2 cases
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
Conte v. City of Eugene, 425 P.3d 494 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(7)(c) — 1 case
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(8) — 18 cases
Wicks-Snodgrass v. City of Reedsport, 939 P.2d 625 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “830(8) (then codified as ORS 197.830(7)) must be read together with the notice requirement in ORS 215.”
Foland v. Jackson Cnty., 807 P.2d 801 (Or. 1991).
Orenco Neighborhood Org. v. City of Hillsboro, 899 P.2d 720 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
State ex rel. Butler v. City of Bandon, 131 P.3d 855 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(9) — 14 cases
Root v. Klamath Cnty., 320 P.3d 631 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
Friends of Jacksonville v. City of Jacksonville, 76 P.3d 121 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Woodard v. City of Cottage Grove, 201 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
Aleali v. City of Sherwood, 325 P.3d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “The time to appeal was changed to 21 days in 1983, and the LUBA appeal provisions were codified in ORS 197.830. Or Laws 1983, ch 827, § 31(7).”
Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene, 344 P.3d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “) In its view, ORS 197.830 (7)(a) and (c) “establish a 21-day period for filing a motion to intervene that runs from the filing of the notice of intent to appeal, and impose a jurisdictional consequence for filing after the deadline” — denial of the motion.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.830(ll)(c) — 1 case
Johns v. City of Lincoln City, 933 P.2d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.