Gaines v. Linn County
Oregon Supreme Court
Plaintiffs appeal. On the seventh day of November, 1890, a petition was presented to the circuit judge of the third judicial district for a writ of review, for the purpose of reviewing the proceedings of the county court of Linn county in the matter of laying out a county road in said county; upon which application an order was made, directing the writ to issue.
Read the full summary
Plaintiffs appeal. On the seventh day of November, 1890, a petition was presented to the circuit judge of the third judicial district for a writ of review, for the purpose of reviewing the proceedings of the county court of Linn county in the matter of laying out a county road in said county; upon which application an order was made, directing the writ to issue. The petition for the writ alleges that the road runs across the lands of the plaintiffs herein, who are householders residing in the vicinity of said road. Said writ was duly issued and served, and the county clerk duly returned the…
1Opinion of the CourtStrahaN, C. J.
The sole question presented by this record is, whether a person who is neither a petitioner for a county road nor a remonstrator against its location, may prosecute a writ of review to question the jurisdiction or regularity of the proceedings of the county court.
Section 583, Hill’s Code, provides: “Any party to any process or proceeding before or by any inferior court, officer, or tribunal, may have the decision or determination thereof reviewed for errors therein, as in this title prescribed, and not otherwise.” It, therefore, becomes necessary to determine whether these plaintiffs were…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Minard v. Douglas CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1881
- Whitely v. Platte CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Richman v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Commissioners of Roads & Revenue v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Adams v. Trustees, &c., of Town of ClarksburgWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- California Development Co. v. New Liverpool Salt Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
- Strawberry Hill 4 Wheelers v. Board of CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978