Legal Opinion
Hay v. Bruno
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided June 6, 1972No. Civ. 68-300PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Before CARTER and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON, District Judge. SOLOMON, District Judge:
Plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of Chapter 601, Oregon Laws 1969, codified as Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) § 390.610 through § 390.690. They assert that the enforcements of these statutes, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Oregon in State ex rel. Thornton v. Hay, 254 Or. 584, 462 P.2d 671 (1969), and as applied to them, would take their property without compensation in violation of their federally protected constitutional rights.
In this action before a three-judge court,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Patterson v. Colorado Ex Rel. Attorney General of Colo.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Borax Consolidated, Ltd. v. Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Hughes v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Marks v. WhitneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Gion v. City of Santa CruzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hay v. Oregon Department of TransportationOregon Supreme Court · 1986
- Stevens v. City of Cannon BeachOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Department of Natural Resources v. Mayor of Ocean CityCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- McDonald v. HalvorsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
- Department of Natural Resources v. Mayor of Ocean CityCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.