Watson v. City of Salem
Oregon Supreme Court
From Marion: William Galloway, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mb. Justice Habéis. This suit involves the validity of a local assessment for a street improvement. Notwithstanding a remonstrance filed by certain property owners the city entered into a contract for the paving of South 12th Street between Mission Street and the south city limits; and upon the completion of the improvement a special assessment was levied upon the abutting property for the cost of the pavement.
Read the full summary
From Marion: William Galloway, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mb. Justice Habéis. This suit involves the validity of a local assessment for a street improvement. Notwithstanding a remonstrance filed by certain property owners the city entered into a contract for the paving of South 12th Street between Mission Street and the south city limits; and upon the completion of the improvement a special assessment was levied upon the abutting property for the cost of the pavement. Claiming that the assessment was void George J. Watson and twenty-two others commenced this suit for the purpose of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harris
The plaintiffs contend that the assessment is void because a sufficient remonstrance was filed against the proposal to pave the street and because the notice for bids was not published in conformity with the provisions of the charter.
Section 28 of the charter directs that a proposed improvement shall not be proceeded with “if the owners of more than two-thirds majority of the superficial area of the property adjacent to such street or part thereof,” file a written remonstrance within a specified time. Earnestly arguing that the remonstrance filed did not contain the necessary “more than…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Gregg's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Dever v. CornwellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901
- Finlayson v. PetersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
- Bacon v. KennedyMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Ward v. WaltersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Twohy Bros. v. Ochoco Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- State v. HeckerOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Kirk v. WoodsOregon Supreme Court · 1959
- Cunningham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Board of Directors of North Unit Irr. Dist. Gard v. PeckOregon Supreme Court · 1919
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.