Borton v. City of Portland
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: William N. Gatens, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Bean. This is an action by Luther H. Borton against the City of Portland to recover money paid on an assessment for a water main. From a judgement sustaining the demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint and dismissing the action, plaintiff appeals. Prior to June 9, 1909, the City of Portland acquired a water system by issuing bonds, and from time to time laid water mains.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: William N. Gatens, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Bean. This is an action by Luther H. Borton against the City of Portland to recover money paid on an assessment for a water main. From a judgement sustaining the demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint and dismissing the action, plaintiff appeals. Prior to June 9, 1909, the City of Portland acquired a water system by issuing bonds, and from time to time laid water mains. Provision was made that the interest on the bonds, a sinking fund for redeeming the same, and the cost of laying the water mains should be paid for out of the water…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bean
The question to be determined is whether or not plaintiff the present owner of the lot, is entitled to collect the refund. This money is to be refunded or paid pursuant to the city charter referred to, which plainly provides that it may be refunded to persons who have paid the assessments for the laying of water mains in front of or adjacent to their property. Portland Charter, as amended, § 227. Therefore whatever may be said in regard to the equities in the matter which are strongly urged in favor of plaintiff, the right to receive the money depends upon the law referred to. We are not…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kaston v. PaxtonOregon Supreme Court · 1905
- Bernays v. WurmbMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877
- Smith v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Striker v. StrikerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- James v. SchmidtNew York City Court · 1888
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of Grand Rapids v. Iosco Land Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1935
- Neer v. SalemOregon Supreme Court · 1915
- State Ex Rel. Dunmore Realty Co. v. KimballSupreme Court of Missouri · 1926
- Trustees of the Methodist Episcopal Church South v. AylorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1930