Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rogers v. Myers

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 28, 2008No. SC S055425Published

1DissentBalmer, J.

I respectfully dissent. I would certify the Attorney General’s ballot title for two reasons. First, in my view, the Attorney General’s ballot title for Initiative Petition 133 substantially complies with the statutory requirements for a ballot title. See ORS 250.085(5) (stating “substantial compliance” test). Second, this court earlier certified the Attorney General’s ballot title for another measure, Initiative Petition 104, that is similar to the measure at issue here. The Attorney General’s ballot titles for the two measures also are similar, as are petitioner’s grounds for challenging the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Crumpton v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Rooney v. KULONGOSKI (ELECTIONS DIV. 21)Oregon Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Sizemore v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Mannix v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API