Legal Opinion

GLEASON v. Thornton

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 1957PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKester, J.

This is a declaratory judgment proceeding to determine the duty to pay and the manner of payment of the expenses and attorneys’ fees incurred by the Attorney General in the current vice investigations and prosecutions in Multnomah county.

The trial court decreed that the salaries and personal expenses of the Attorney General and his assistants (whether full or part-time) are to be paid by the State of Oregon, and all other necessary and reasonable costs, fees and expenses shall be paid by Multnomah county; and as to the latter, that claims shall be prepared in accordance with the auditing…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Burrage v. County of BristolMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  2. Wemme v. First Church of ChristOregon Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Schubel v. OlcottOregon Supreme Court · 1912
  4. State Ex Rel. State Public Welfare Commission v. County Court of Malheur CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Miller v. HenryOregon Supreme Court · 1912

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. PACIFIC NORTHWEST DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. HollowayOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State Housing Council v. City of Lake OswegoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  3. Burks v. Lane CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  4. State v. MarinoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  5. White v. Umatilla CountyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1965

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API