Trainor v. County of Multnomah
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Multnomah Cmmty. On the 15th day of July, 1866, wishing to procure a license for the retailing of spirituous liquors, Trainor deposited with the treasurer of Multnomah county, the sum of fifty dollars as payment for a license. Subsequently he applied for said license which was refused him, and he then demanded a return of said sum of money which was also refused.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Multnomah Cmmty. On the 15th day of July, 1866, wishing to procure a license for the retailing of spirituous liquors, Trainor deposited with the treasurer of Multnomah county, the sum of fifty dollars as payment for a license. Subsequently he applied for said license which was refused him, and he then demanded a return of said sum of money which was also refused. The defendant demurred to the complaint containing those averments, on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and that there was a defect of parties; that the county treasurer…
1Opinion of the CourtSkinner, J.
The act of the legislature passed January 18th, 1854, provides that any person, wishing to procure a license to retail spirituous liquors, must give public notice for at least ten days, that, at the next term of the County Court he will apply for said license; must present’ to said court at said term a petition signed by a majority of the legal voters of the precinct in which the grocery is to he located, praying that said license be granted, and also present the receipt of the county treasurer for the sum of one hun*215dred dollars if the license is for one year, or in the same proportion for a…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McLeod v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Hague v. City of AshlandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895