Legal Opinion

In Re Board of Directors of Tillamook People's Utility District

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 1938PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.

It is urged by appellant Clark Hadley, in support of his demurrer, that the act under which said utility district was created was in contravention of the due process clause of section 1 of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution of the United States, and section 10 of Art. I of the constitution of the state of Oregon, and that it unlawfully delegates legislative power, in violation of section 1, Art. Ill, and section 1, Art. IV, of the constitution of Oregon. It is urged by the appellant that the act in question makes no provision for a hearing on the question of the property to be…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Browning v. HooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Jones v. City of PortlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
  3. Embree v. Kansas City & Liberty Boulevard Road DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  4. Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. SeattleSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  5. Straw v. HarrisOregon Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Hillman v. Northern Wasco County PUDOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  2. DeFazio v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Board of Directors of Northern Wasco County People's Utility District v. KellyOregon Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Highland Realty Co. v. City of San RafaelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Northern Wasco County People's Utility District v. Wasco CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1957

8 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