Oregon Box & Mfg. Co. v. Jones Lumber Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, J.
The plaintiffs' contend that the ordinance set out in the amended complaint is exercised under a specific grant of power authorizing the city to legislate in the particular manner set out in Section 448 of said ordinance. Based upon that -premise they claim that the court was without authority to declare the ordinance unreasonable: 2 Mc Quillin, Municipal Corp., 1570, § 724; 2 Dillon (5 ed.), 943, § 600; Cooley on Constitutional Limitations, 201; Darlington v. Ward, 48 S. C. 570 (26 S. E. 906, 38 L. R. A. 326-333 et seq.); City of Baltimore v. Wollman, 123 Md. 310, 319 (91 Atl. 339); Zucht v.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Welch v. SwaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Atkinson v. Goodrich Transportation Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Peterson v. Standard Oil Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1910
- City of St. Louis v. Edward Heitzeberg Packing & Provision Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Winslow v. FleischnerOregon Supreme Court · 1924
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. DennisOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Sullivan v. Mountain States Power Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1932
- Silver Falls Timber Co. v. Eastern & Western Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1934
- Hise v. City of North BendOregon Supreme Court · 1931
- State of Oregon v. WattsOregon Supreme Court · 1956
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.