Do you really think the issue will be put to sleep.

On one class of trailer...the 'box trailer.' The DRs may be sufficiently vague with regard to something that is mobile (not remaining in a fixed position and only used as storage) and most likely used in the resident's regular course of business. Interpretation...or perhaps more importantly misinterpretation...becomes possible.

A possible decision could be OK allow trailers to be parked on an owner's lot.  does that mean an owner can park  a camping trailer on a vacant lot and used it as a weekend camper?

The issue of a trailer used as a dwelling is specifically addressed in the DRs...there is nothing vague about it and I don't forsee that issue being impacted by Marty's challenge. Open utility trailers of specified dimensions and boat trailers are allowed...I don't see the challenge impacting on anything OPA has adequately addressed in its documents.

What I foresee is a decision on whether the verbage in the DRs can be interpreted to address the specific category of 'work trailers' of a 'box design' regardless of size. A court decision doesn't nullify every element of a document...it usually says that in a particular instance the existing rule is not sufficient.

I beleive we must be careful what we ask for as we might not like the answer.

If in fact the courts rule against OPA in this matter there could be an opportunity to revise the 'rules.' Nothing says that if Marty wins, OPA cannot revisit the issue and perhaps create a clearer definition of what it wants to allow or prohibit. Sometimes it takes a court decision that overturns an existing rule to force constructive change and get it right. Happens all of the time.