Byers v. City of Sheridan
Oregon Supreme Court
From Yamhill: Harry H. Belt, Judge. Department 2. This is a suit to restrain the City of Sheridan from collecting assessments' for the improvement of Mill Street in that city.
Read the full summary
From Yamhill: Harry H. Belt, Judge. Department 2. This is a suit to restrain the City of Sheridan from collecting assessments' for the improvement of Mill Street in that city. The provision of the charter, prescribing the manner of giving notice. of such proposed improvement, is as follows: “Such notice must be given by the recorder, by order of the council, and must specify with convenient certainty the street or part thereof proposed to be improved, or of which the grade is proposed to be established or altered, and the kind of improvement which is proposed to be made and the time when the…
1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, C. J.
In its principal features this case is subject to the same objections as were noted in the case of Henderson v. Sheridan, ante, p. 149 (191 Pac. 350), The notice simply described the proposed improvement as a hard-surface pavement 16 feet in width. The word “pavement” is defined as “a hard, solid surface covering of stone, brick, concrete, asphalt or wood”: Standard Diet., *157title “Pavement.” Any one of these, including wood blocks, will answer the description of a “hard-surface pavement.” It is well known that these differ in cost; that different kinds of concrete, bitulithic, and asphalt…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Strout v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1894
- Henderson v. City of SheridanOregon Supreme Court · 1920
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bass v. City of CasperWyoming Supreme Court · 1922