State v. George
Oregon Supreme Court
Multnomah, county: E. D. Shattuck, Judge. Plaintiff appeals. This was a proceeding in the nature of a quo warranto brought by the state upon the relation of D. F. Sherman, a citizen and taxpayer, to try the title of the respondents to hold the office of bridge committeemen, under the act of the legislative assembly, commonly known as the Meussdorffer Act.
Read the full summary
Multnomah, county: E. D. Shattuck, Judge. Plaintiff appeals. This was a proceeding in the nature of a quo warranto brought by the state upon the relation of D. F. Sherman, a citizen and taxpayer, to try the title of the respondents to hold the office of bridge committeemen, under the act of the legislative assembly, commonly known as the Meussdorffer Act. By section 2 of said act, it is provided that the power and authority given to the cities named in Section 1 hereof, since consolidated as the city of Portland, to construct, purchase, hire, keep up and maintain bridges across the Willamette…
1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.
The question presented for our determination arises upon the sufficiency of the facts to show whether or not the defendants are entitled to hold the office of bridge committee and to exercise the functions thereof. The aim of the proceeding is to test the constitutionality of the method provided by the act, (Laws, 1891, 633,) commonly known as the Meussdorffer Act, for the appointment of the bridge committee. It is insisted that the facts alleged *150show that the defendants are holding the offices of bridge committee, and exercising the functions thereof without title or legal right, because the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People ex rel. Grinnell v. HoffmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1886
- Biggs v. McBrideOregon Supreme Court · 1889
- People ex rel. Dunham v. MorganIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
- David v. Portland Water CommitteeOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Osborn v. GantzNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Richardson v. YoungTennessee Supreme Court · 1909
- In re the Appointment of a Revisor of the StatutesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Simon v. NorthupOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Sibert v. GarrettCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922
- Ingard v. BarkerIdaho Supreme Court · 1915
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.