Portland General Electric Co. v. Roberts
Oregon Supreme Court
1Concurrence
LENT, J.,
specially concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority, but I do not agree with the path taken by the majority.
ORAP 15.05 was effective March 1, 1985. The petition to review the ballot title provided by the Attorney General and filed with the Secretary of State was filed more than six months later on September 9,1985.
The petitioners for review of the title, who have moved for waiver of ORAP 15.05(3), are correct in asserting that the rule is not well drawn. ORAP 15.05(3) provides in pertinent part:
“The petition shall show proof of service on the following persons, if…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Portland General Electric Co. v. RobertsOregon Supreme Court · 1985