Legal Opinion

Joplin v. Ten Brook

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 20, 1928PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, J.

This suit was begun originally for the purpose of having a certain ordinance of the City of Astoria, designated as Ordinance No. 27-82, submitting an amendment to the city charter of the City of Astoria, to be submitted to the voters of that city, declared void, and the proposed enactment amending the city charter, being Ordinance No. 27-83, also declared void, and to enjoin any proceeding by the city council thereunder.

"We had occasion to consider the validity of the proposed amendment to the city charter herein referred to in the ease of Hauke v. Ten Brook et al., 122 Or. 485 (259 Pac.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Kadderly v. PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Caseday v. LindstromOregon Supreme Court · 1904
  3. In Re HoffmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Graciosa Oil Co. v. County of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Campbell v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Monahan v. FunkOregon Supreme Court · 1931
  2. State Ex Rel. Hunzicker v. PulliamSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
  3. Davis v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  4. City of Phoenix v. Landrum & Mills Realty Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Garbade and Boynton v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1950

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

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

Powered by the Exa API