197.845 Stay
of decision being reviewed; criteria; undertaking; conditions; limitations. (1) Upon application of the
petitioner, the board may grant a stay of a land use decision or limited land
use decision under review if the petitioner demonstrates:
(a) A colorable
claim of error in the land use decision or limited land use decision under
review; and
(b) That the
petitioner will suffer irreparable injury if the stay is not granted.
(2) If the board
grants a stay of a quasi-judicial land use decision or limited land use
decision approving a specific development of land, it shall require the
petitioner requesting the stay to give an undertaking in the amount of $5,000
in addition to the filing fee under ORS 197.830 (9). The board may impose other
reasonable conditions such as requiring the petitioner to file all documents
necessary to bring the matter to issue within specified reasonable periods of
time.
(3) If the board
affirms a quasi-judicial land use decision or limited land use decision for
which a stay was granted under subsections (1) and (2) of this section, the
board shall award reasonable attorney fees and actual damages resulting from
the stay to the person who requested the land use decision or limited land use
decision from the local government, special district or state agency, against
the person requesting the stay in an amount not to exceed the amount of the
undertaking.
(4) The board
shall limit the effect of a stay of a legislative land use decision to the
geographic area or to particular provisions of the legislative decision for
which the petitioner has demonstrated a colorable claim of error and
irreparable injury under subsection (1) of this section. The board may impose
reasonable conditions on a stay of a legislative decision, such as the giving
of a bond or other undertaking or a requirement that the petitioner file all
documents necessary to bring the matter to issue within a specified reasonable
time period. [1983 c.827 §34; 1989 c.761 §22; 1991 c.817 §28; 1999 c.621 §9;
2021 c.61 §2]
Notes of Decisions
State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Balderas (2001)
orctapp
“482(3) (authorizing stays of enforcement of agency orders in contested cases pending judicial review); and ORS 197.845(1) (authorizing the Land Use Board of Appeals to grant stays of land use decisions being reviewed in that tribunal).”
State ex rel. Department of Human Services v. Rardin (2005)
or
“222(7) (“defendant may appeal under this subsection only upon showing a colorable claim of error * * *”); ORS 197.845(1) (“Upon application of the petitioner, the board may grant a stay of a land use decision or limited land use decision under review if the petitioner…”
Dames v. City of Medford (1984)
orctapp · cites it 12×
“Pursuant to ORS 197.845, LUBA ordered the street-widening project stayed while the appeal was pending and required Dames to post a $5,000 bond.”
Young v. Crook County (2008)
orctapp
“The Board may also upon motion or at its direction take evidence to resolve disputes regarding the content of the record, requests for stays, attorney fees, or actual damages under ORS 197.845. “(2) Motions to Take Evidence: “(a) A motion to take evidence shall contain a…”
STATE EX REL. DHS v. Rardin (2005)
or
“222(7) ("defendant may appeal under this subsection only upon showing a colorable claim of error * * * "); ORS 197.845(1) ("Upon application of the petitioner, the board may grant a stay of a land use decision or limited land use decision under review if the petitioner…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.845(1) — 3 cases
State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Balderas (2001)
orctapp
“482(3) (authorizing stays of enforcement of agency orders in contested cases pending judicial review); and ORS 197.845(1) (authorizing the Land Use Board of Appeals to grant stays of land use decisions being reviewed in that tribunal).”
State ex rel. Department of Human Services v. Rardin (2005)
or
“222(7) (“defendant may appeal under this subsection only upon showing a colorable claim of error * * *”); ORS 197.845(1) (“Upon application of the petitioner, the board may grant a stay of a land use decision or limited land use decision under review if the petitioner…”
STATE EX REL. DHS v. Rardin (2005)
or
“222(7) ("defendant may appeal under this subsection only upon showing a colorable claim of error * * * "); ORS 197.845(1) ("Upon application of the petitioner, the board may grant a stay of a land use decision or limited land use decision under review if the petitioner…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.845(2) — 1 case
Dames v. City of Medford (1984)
orctapp
“Pursuant to ORS 197.845, LUBA ordered the street-widening project stayed while the appeal was pending and required Dames to post a $5,000 bond.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.845(3) — 1 case
Dames v. City of Medford (1984)
orctapp
“Pursuant to ORS 197.845, LUBA ordered the street-widening project stayed while the appeal was pending and required Dames to post a $5,000 bond.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.845(4) — 1 case
Dames v. City of Medford (1984)
orctapp
“Pursuant to ORS 197.845, LUBA ordered the street-widening project stayed while the appeal was pending and required Dames to post a $5,000 bond.”
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.