Legal Opinion

Pioneer Real Estate Co. v. City of Portland

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 1926PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The plaintiff assails the validity of the ordinance for the reason, it asserts, that the project embraces many features other than those pertaining to a sewer and therefore is beyond the power conferred upon the City of Portland by its charter. Plaintiff says in its brief:

“The question before the court is to determine whether or not the proposed construction constitutes a sewer, manhole, lamp hole, catch-basin, or branch sewer. If it does the respondent should prevail. If it does not, the appellant should prevail.”

The testimony in the record proves beyond peradventure that the sanitary…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
  2. Imperial Irrigation Co. v. JayneTexas Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Terrell v. SparksTexas Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Mound City Land & Stock Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
  5. Aransas County v. Coleman-Fulton Pasture Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Wentz v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  2. Anselmi v. City of Rock SpringsWyoming Supreme Court · 1938
  3. State Ex Rel. Wright v. HeadrickIdaho Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Rorick v. Dalles CityOregon Supreme Court · 1932
  5. MacVeagh v. Multnomah CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1928

15 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