Graziano v. City Council of Canby
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1DissentThornton, J.
The majority opinion concludes first that the petitioner chose the wrong remedy, viz., writ of review, and second, that the defendant city council acted lawfully in dismissing petitioner.
I am unable to agree with either conclusion for the following reasons:
First, as I read ORS 34.040, the writ of review is clearly a cognizable remedy here under the facts and the express language of ORS 34.040 (as expanded by the 1973 amendments), which states inter alia:
"The writ shall be allowed in all cases where the inferior court, officer, or tribunal other than an agency as defined in subsection (1) of…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Lane County v. R. A. Heintz Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961
- Brooks v. DierkerOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- City of Portland v. DuntleyOregon Supreme Court · 1949
- Oakman v. City of EvelethSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.