Union Fishermen's Co. v. Shoemaker
Oregon Supreme Court
From Clatsop: James A. Eakin, Judge. Department 1. The Union Fishermen’s Co-operative Packing Company and five other Oregon corporations own and operate in Oregon large, salmon canneries at or near the month of the Columbia River. The defendant Carl D. Shoemaker was, at the time of the 'commencement of this suit, the game warden and master fish warden of the State of Oregon, and it was his official duty tó enforce the game and fish laws of this state.
Read the full summary
From Clatsop: James A. Eakin, Judge. Department 1. The Union Fishermen’s Co-operative Packing Company and five other Oregon corporations own and operate in Oregon large, salmon canneries at or near the month of the Columbia River. The defendant Carl D. Shoemaker was, at the time of the 'commencement of this suit, the game warden and master fish warden of the State of Oregon, and it was his official duty tó enforce the game and fish laws of this state. Several thousand fishermen are engaged in catching salmon fish with which to supply the canneries operated by the plaintiffs. A considerable…
1Opinion of the CourtHarris, J.
The questions to be decided can be better considered and discussed if we first give an account of the fish legislation, affecting the Columbia River, enacted in the States of Oregon and Washington in the years 1915,1917, and 1919. In 1915, conference committees were appointed by the legislative assemblies of the two states, with the view of agreeing upon fish legislation concerning the Columbia River *665and other waters. The conference committees met and discussed proposed legislation, and as a result the legislative assembly of Oregon passed a “new Fish Code” providing for the regulation of the…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Lawton v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Green v. BiddleSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Geer v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Virginia v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- New York Ex Rel. Silz v. HesterbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- State v. LaundyOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Johnson v. Star MacHinery CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1974
- Sohappy v. SmithDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1969
- Fox v. GallowayOregon Supreme Court · 1944
- Anthony v. VeatchOregon Supreme Court · 1950
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.