Legal Opinion

Curry v. Clackamas County

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 2, 2011No. CV06100319; A139251PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSercombe, J.

Plaintiffs, who filed suit seeking compensation under Measure 37, appeal the subsequent dismissal of that suit following the enactment of Measure 49. On appeal, they advance three general arguments: (1) that Measure 49 does not operate retroactively so as to apply to their “cause of action” under Measure 37; (2) if Measure 49 is retroactive, its application to plaintiffs’ suit violates various provisions of the state and federal constitutions, including Article I, sections 18 and 20, of the Oregon Constitution and the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution;…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Nordlinger v. HahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Clackamas County v. HolmesOregon Supreme Court · 1973
  4. DeMendoza v. HuffmanOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  5. MacPherson v. Department of Administrative ServicesOregon Supreme Court · 2006

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Waters v. Klippel Water, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  2. Friends of Yamhill County v. Board of County CommissionersYamhill County Circuit Court, Oregon · 2016
  3. Campbell v. Clackamas CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. Curry v. Clackamas CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. Fischer v. Benton CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API