Mannix v. Kulongoski
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*488GILLETTE, J.
These are three original proceedings, consolidated for argument and opinion, in which three separate petitioners or groups of petitioners challenge the ballot title for SJR 41, which was referred to the voters by the legislature. Each petitioner is an elector who, in a timely manner, submitted written comments about the Attorney General’s draft ballot title, pursuant to ORS 250.067(1). Accordingly, each is entitled to seek a different title in this court. ORS 250.085(2). We have considered each of petitioners’ arguments concerning the Attorney General’s ballot title. We conclude…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. HenryOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- City of Portland v. TidymanOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- Mannix v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Arenz v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1993
3Cited by5 opinions
- Carlson v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1998
- Carson v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1998
- Carlson v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1998
- Mannix v. KulongoskiOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Sizemore v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1997