State v. Plummer
Oregon Supreme Court
Original proceedings in mandamus in' Supreme Court. On motion of defendant to dismiss. Department 2. The relators present a petition for a writ of mandamus, and allege, in substance, the following facts: Petitioner George H. Kelly is the owner of the legal title to lots 1, 2, and 3 in block 4, Johnson’s Addition to the City of Portland.
Read the full summary
Original proceedings in mandamus in' Supreme Court. On motion of defendant to dismiss. Department 2. The relators present a petition for a writ of mandamus, and allege, in substance, the following facts: Petitioner George H. Kelly is the owner of the legal title to lots 1, 2, and 3 in block 4, Johnson’s Addition to the City of Portland. Prior to December, 1919, petitioner C. V. Everett contracted to purchase the premises and pay Kelly a part of the purchase price in deferred payments, and agreed to begin promptly the construction of a high-grade fireproof apartment house on the premises.…
1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.
The defendant has filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding as not being a proper one for this court to consider in the exercise of its original jurisdiction. The application for the writ not having been served upon the defendant before being filed in compliance with Eule 33, we will consider the matter as though the alternative writ had not been issued.
The proceeding is brought in reliance upon Article VII, of Section 2, of the Constitution of Oregon, as amended in 1910, which contains the following:
*523“But the Supreme Court may, in its own discretion, take original jurisdiction in mandamus, quo…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ex parte JermanOregon Supreme Court · 1910
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Godfrey v. TurnerWashington Supreme Court · 1920
- Ross v. County Court of Marion CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1934
- State ex rel. Heltzel v. Portland Traction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1955