PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — A court order requiring defendants in the Oswego Lake public access case to cover plaintiffs’ attorney fees is being challenged.

The City of Lake Oswego filed a notice of appeal against the order from Clackamas County Circuit Court Judge Kathie Steele on Tuesday. The State of Oregon and Lake Oswego Corporation, which represents homeowners in the neighborhood surrounding the lake, filed appeal notices earlier in July.

Judge Steele issued the order in June, requiring the three parties to pay more than $1.5 million to the attorneys of plaintiffs Todd Prager and Mark Kramer. The homeowners’ group was directed to pay the largest share, about 45% of the total, while the city was ordered to pay 35% and the state 20%.

Although Steele described the legal fees as “certainly large sums,” she noted they date back to the beginning of a 13-year-old legal battle.

Prager and Kramer first filed the lawsuit that argued Oswego Lake should be open to the public in 2012. It wasn’t until March of this year that the Clackamas County judge ordered city officials to stop enforcing the public access ban and to remove any signage telling visitors they can’t access the water from Millennium Plaza Park.

Lake Oswego Corporation filed a notice of appeal against the decision shortly after.

Later in April, both Oregon and Lake Oswego stated their case for why they shouldn’t be on the hook for legal fees. While the state claimed the case “was not fought against the State nor was the victory they secured against the State,” the city alleged the state “abdicated its responsibility over issues of navigability and aligned itself with the Plaintiffs.”

But according to Steele’s order, all defendants are responsible for doling out attorney fees because Oswego Lake was previously regarded as a private body of water, and the years-long legal battle benefits the public.

“Although this court did not observe an active participation by the State, it is clear from the record that early on (before 2019), the State supported the City’s argument that the public had no right of access to publicly owned waterways from abutting public lands,” Steele wrote. “And the City made improvements to the potential access points and then argued that those improvements prohibited the public from accessing the lake. The ordinance was ultimately the only reason this litigation has continued for more than decade.”

The judge added that Lake Oswego Corporation is also liable because it “governed and controlled access” to the lake at the center of the lawsuit.