Legal Opinion
Smith v. Cenarrusa
Idaho Supreme Court
Decided October 5, 1970No. 10724PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SPIEPARD, Justice.
The facts in this case are not disputed. We are asked to determine whether the method prescribed in our constitution for revision of the constitution.is the sole and exclusive method. In actuality what we are being asked to consider and rule upon is the procedure for the adoption of a new constitution. Senate Joint Resolution 122 of the 1970 session of the Idaho Legislature prescribes a technique for revising the constitution of the state of Idaho in a manner not specifically authorized by the constitution. The plaintiff, Raymon L. Smith, brought this action ' seeking a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Home Building & Loan Assn. v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- McFadden v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Livermore v. WaiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Wheeler v. Board of Trustees of Fargo Consolidated School DistrictSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
- McBee v. BradyIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kansas City Millwright Co., Inc. v. KalbSupreme Court of Kansas · 1977
- State v. ManleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1983
- Brown v. Federal Savings & Loan InsuranceNevada Supreme Court · 1989
- Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports1995
- Smith v. CenarrusaIdaho Supreme Court · 1970