Legal Opinion
Davis v. Van Winkle
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided May 31, 1929PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AFFIRMED. This is an appeal from the Attorney General's rule on a ballot title for House Bill No. 330, enacted by the 1929 legislature, for the purpose of providing two additional circuit judges for the Fourth Judicial District of the State of Oregon, comprising Multnomah County. A petition to refer said bill to the people has been duly filed. The Attorney General described the purpose of the bill as follows: "To provide for two additional judges of the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the Fourth Judicial District, comprising Multnomah County." No objection has been or could be taken…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Big Creek Ditch Co. v. HoffmanOregon Supreme Court · 1929
3Cited by8 opinions
- M. S. v. Kate BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Ferry v. PaulusOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- Portland Pendleton Motor Transportation Co. v. HeltzelOregon Supreme Court · 1953
- De Young v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
- Columbia River Salmon & Tuna Packers Ass'n v. ThorntonOregon Supreme Court · 1958
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.