Legal Opinion

Spencer v. City of Medford

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 19, 1929PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, J.

The sole question to be determined here is whether the city has jurisdiction to pass an ordinance regulating the method of disposal of the kind of garbage with which plaintiffs are concerned. That the materials which they are engaged in hauling away, for the purpose of feeding their swine, is, in fact, garbage, is admitted in the complaint, and that it is useful for the purpose of feeding hogs, is admitted by the demurrer. Discussion of the provisions of the ordinance as to ashes and rubbish are not germane to this controversy. If legislation regulating the handling of such materials is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. California Reduction Co. v. Sanitary Reduction WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  2. State v. OrrSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
  3. Iler v. RossNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Commonwealth v. WheelerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  5. Pantlind v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Schmidt v. MastersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1971
  2. Elliott v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1930
  3. City of Estacada v. American Sanitary Service, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  4. Jansen Farms, Inc. v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Gardner v. City of DallasCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1936

8 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