Ladd v. Gambell
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah : John B. Cleland, Judge. This suit is brought by Charles E. Ladd to restrain A. N. Gambell, who is the auditor of the City of Portland, from issuing any further bonds under what is called the Bancroft Bonding Act (Laws, 1893, p. 171), because the same is unconstitutional. The provisions of the act are set out in the opinion. Plaintiff had a decree, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Mu. Justice Bean
delivered the opinion of the court.
1. This is a suit to test the validity of what is known as the “Bancroft Bonding Act” (Laws, 1893, p. 171), which- provides, in effect, that whenever any city within this state having a population of twenty-five hundred or more shall improve a street at the expense of the abutting property, any owner of such property whose assessment *397shall exceed $25 may, by filing with the proper officer a written application, be permitted to pay such assessment in ten equal annual installments, the city to issue its six per cent, ten-year bonds for the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Youngblood v. SextonMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Sears v. Board of AldermenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
- King v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1865
- Strickland v. GeideOregon Supreme Court · 1897
- City of Aurora v. McGannonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Colby v. City of MedfordOregon Supreme Court · 1917
- Sandys v. WilliamsOregon Supreme Court · 1905
- Smith v. DayOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Wing v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1968
- Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. John Day Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.