Legal Opinion

State v. City of Marshfield

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1927PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

This is a statutory action to recover the reasonable cost of fighting a forest fire, which had its origin upon land owned by the City of Marsh-field beyond its corporate limits and which spread to other timber land not owned by it. The action is brought by virtue of Section 8960, Or. L., prior to the amendment thereof in 1925, which so far as material herein provides:

“Any fire on any forest land in the state of Oregon burning uncontrolled and without proper precaution being taken to prevent its spread is hereby declared a public nuisance by reason of its menace to life or property. Any…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Donohue v. City of NewburyportMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  2. Eastman v. Jennings-McRae Logging Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Platt v. NewbergOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  4. City of Anniston v. IveySupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
  5. Commonwealth v. WitmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. AnthonyOregon Supreme Court · 1946
  2. County of Ventura v. Southern California Edison Co.California Court of Appeal · 1948
  3. State v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  4. State v. GourleyOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  5. State of Oregon, Acting by and Through Its State Forester, and Klamath Forest Protective Association, an Oregon Nonprofit Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962

2 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