Oliver v. Synhorst
Oregon Supreme Court
From Union: Henry J. Bean, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice McBride. This is a suit by Anna Oliver to restrain Fred Synhorst as street commissioner of the City of La Grande, from removing plaintiff’s fence, and destroying certain shrubs and trees upon lands inclosed by plaintiff, under the claim that such premises are situated upon a public street in the City of La Grande.
Read the full summary
From Union: Henry J. Bean, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice McBride. This is a suit by Anna Oliver to restrain Fred Synhorst as street commissioner of the City of La Grande, from removing plaintiff’s fence, and destroying certain shrubs and trees upon lands inclosed by plaintiff, under the claim that such premises are situated upon a public street in the City of La Grande. The contentions of the parties are fully set forth in Oliver v. Synhorst, 48 Or. 292 (86 Pac. 376: 7 L. R. A. [N. S.] 243), and will not be re-stated here. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. The pleadings and the law of this…
1Opinion
Argued May 1, decided May 23, 1911.
On Rehearing.
2Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett
The premises of the plaintiff are situated in block 74 of Chaplin’s addition to the City of La Grande, in Union County. Fourth Street in that addition runs north and south and bounds the block on the east. 0 Street runs east and west and bounds it on the north. Lot 5 is at the northeast corner of the block. Lot 6 adjoins it on the *587south, and these two lots have a frontage of 110 feet on Fourth Street. Lots 3 and 4 have each a frontage of 60 feet on 0 Street, and all four of the lots have a depth of 110 feet and as a body are bounded on the south…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Schooling v. HarrisburgOregon Supreme Court · 1903
- Moore v. FowlerOregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Spencer v. PetersonOregon Supreme Court · 1902
- Nodine v. UnionOregon Supreme Court · 1903
4Cited by1 opinion
- Oliver v. SynhorstOregon Supreme Court · 1910