Bennett v. City of Portland
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, J.
The auditorium was not used by the defendant city in its governmental capacity. It was not used generally in the performance of any governmental duty. It is owned and operated by the city in its corporate or proprietary capacity; Chafor v. City of Long Beach, 174 Cal. 478 (163 Pac. 670, Ann. Cas. 1918D, 106, L. E. A. 1917E, 685); Klein v. Portland, 106 Or. 686 (213 Pac. 147). Little v. Holyoke, 177 Mass. 114 (58 N. E. 170, 52 L. R. A. 417), is a parallel case.
In the management and operation of the auditorium the city is liable to the same extent and under the same circumstances that a private…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Hill v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Oliver v. City of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Esberg Cigar Co. v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1899
- Chafor v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Marwedel v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Hillman v. Northern Wasco County PUDOregon Supreme Court · 1958
- Strandholm v. General Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1963
- Mollencop v. City of SalemOregon Supreme Court · 1932
- Hise v. City of North BendOregon Supreme Court · 1931
- Fielding v. Publix Cars, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1936
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.