Legal Opinion

Menstell v. Johnson

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 1927PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

The design of Ladd’s Addition indicates clearly that the dedicator intended it should be a residential area, — in fact, a beautiful subdivision of the City of Portland. In addition to the central park, he provided four others; all five are small, but nevertheless they are so placed and the streets so laid out that the majority of the lots front either on the parks, or have a view of shrubbery in the parks. To this subdivision and to its principal avenue Mr. Ladd gave his name. Having arranged the streets and the parks in a unique and beautiful manner, he put upon each lot a building line and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Carter v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Meier v. Portland Cable Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1888
  3. McCloskey v. KirkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
  4. Steel v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Zinn v. SidlerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Town of Blowing Rock v. GregorieSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Wischmeyer v. FinchIndiana Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Parrish v. NewburyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1955
  4. Southwest Petroleum Co. v. LoganSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
  5. Swaggerty v. PetersenOregon Supreme Court · 1977

13 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