Legal Opinion

In re Oberg

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1891PublishedCited by 26 opinions

State appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.

The petitioner was constable of Astoria precinct, and having arrested a sailor on board of a sea-going vessel as an absconding debtor, he was himself arrested under the provisions of section -6 of the act of 1889, which *407made such arrests unlawful, and for which he was fined the sum of twenty dollars. Upon default in the payment of such fine, he was committed to jail, and thereupon sued out a writ of habeas corpus. Upon the hearing, the trial court held that the act of 1889 was unconstitutional and void, and discharged the petitioner. While the brief indicates other objections to the act, the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co. v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Barbier v. ConnollySupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  3. McAunich v. Mississippi & Missouri RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
  4. Iowa Railroad Land v. SoperSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
  5. Soon Hing v. CrowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1885

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State v. ClarkOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State v. FreelandOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Corporation of the Sisters of Mercy v. Lane CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Wright v. WimberlyOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  5. State v. MullerOregon Supreme Court · 1906

21 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