Legal Opinion
State v. Kingsley
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided November 4, 1974No. 74-01-0295 CrPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchwab, C. J.
Defendant having been served with a citation charging her with a violation of Portland City Ordinance, Section 13.04.060,
a* * * [Defendant] did then and there own a dog * * * answering to Charlie * * * [and] willfully and unlawfully violate Municipal Ordinance of Portland, Oregon, by knowing or having reason to know the dog has bitten * * * Mrs. Logan’s eat [name not stated] * * *.”,①
was tried and convicted in the District Court of Multnomah County. The case was tried in district court under the provisions of OES 46.045 (1) enacted by the 1971 legislature, providing:
“The district court for a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- City of Salem v. PolanskiOregon Supreme Court · 1954
- City of Portland v. Lloyd A. Fry Roofing CompanyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970
- City of Portland v. Trumbull Asphalt CompanyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970
- City of Mt. Angel v. Van CleveCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
- City of Portland v. OlsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Klamath Falls v. WintersOregon Supreme Court · 1980
- City of Portland v. PoindexterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
- City of Klamath Falls v. WintersOregon Supreme Court · 1980