Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Kane v. Goldschmidt

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1989No. SC S36443PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeterson, C. J.

This is an original proceeding in mandamus filed after the Legislative Assembly enacted Oregon Laws 1989, chapter 1032 (chapter 1032). The plaintiff seeks (1) to have the law declared unconstitutional and (2) to halt proposed government action thereunder. The plaintiff seeks a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the defendants to “halt actions and expenditures to implement” chapter 1032 and “not to execute” any contracts thereunder, and to “stop implementation of ORS 276.009, 276.429 and 276.218 to the extent that any proposed contract or agreement calls for the state * * * to make payments…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Texas National Guard Armory Board. v. McCrawTexas Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Smith v. CooperOregon Supreme Court · 1970
  3. State Ex Rel. Thomson v. GiesselWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  4. DeFazio v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Glennon Heights, Inc. v. Central Bank & TrustSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. McIntire v. ForbesOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  2. In Re the Oklahoma Capitol Improvement AuthoritySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1998
  3. Borne Ex Rel. Borne v. Northwest Allen County School Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. Department of Ecology v. State Finance CommitteeWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. Hirsch/FriendOregon Supreme Court · 2005

19 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