Legal Opinion
Daniels v. City of Portland
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided March 8, 1928PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The plaintiff contends that that part of the ordinance known as the Housing Code of the City of Portland set out in our statement is unconstitutional, in that it is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and of Sections 1, 18 and 21, Article I, of the Oregon Constitution, and that the ordinance is arbitrary and not a proper exercise of the police power vested in the City of Portland.
If the ordinance is within the lawful exercise of the police power of the defendant municipality, it is not contrary to either the state or the federal Constitution. This…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Noble State Bank v. HaskellSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Camfield v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Tanner v. LittleSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Rideout v. KnoxMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Kardy v. SHOOK, J.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Baer v. CITY OF BENDOregon Supreme Court · 1956
- State Ex Rel. Lavoie v. Building CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
- State v. FinneyIdaho Supreme Court · 1944
- Twin Rocks Watseco Defense Committee v. SheetsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.