Bend Pub. Co. v. Haner
| Citation | 118 Or. 105,244 P. 868 |
| Parties | BEND PUB. CO. v. HANER, COUNTY CLERK. |
| Decision Date | 06 April 1926 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Oregon |
Department 2.
Original mandamus by the Bend Publishing Company against J. H. Haner County Clerk. On demurrer to the alternative writ. Demurrer overruled.
Edward F. Bailey, of Junction City (Charles A Hardy, of Eugene, on the brief), for petitioner.
H. H De Armond and R. S. Hamilton, both of Bend (Arthur J. Moore, of Bend, on the brief), for defendant.
This case comes before us on demurrer to an alternative writ of mandamus issued out of this court. It involves the right of a publisher to have access to the records and files of the county and circuit courts for the purpose of securing and preparing matter for newspaper publication. Our inquiry relates to the duty of the clerk in the premises, and to the legal right of the petitioner to have the defendant perform the duty sought to be enforced. The petitioner herein, Bend Publishing Company, a corporation, avers that it publishes the "Central Oregon Press," a daily and weekly newspaper, at Bend, Deschutes county, Or., which paper has a large circulation throughout Deschutes county; that, in order successfully to carry on its business as a newspaper publisher, it is necessary for the petitioner to gather and publish the news of the daily happenings and events taking place within the county; and that, for such purpose, it sends its agents throughout the limits of the county. It avers that suits, actions, and other proceedings of great public interest are filed in the county and circuit courts of Deschutes county; that J. H. Haner, defendant herein, is clerk of that county, and, as such clerk, has the custody and possession of the records and files of the county and circuit courts; that the petitioner has sent its agents to the office of the defendant during the usual business hours to inspect and examine the files and records of the county and circuit courts for the purpose of making memoranda or abstracts therefrom, so that petitioner might publish the same, or so much thereof as it might deem to be of news interest to the readers of its paper; that the petitioner has demanded of the defendant a reasonable and proper opportunity for the inspection of such records, but that the defendant has wrongfully refused, and still refuses, to petitioner, or to any of its agents, an opportunity to inspect and examine the files of the court in his office.
The petition and writ contain the usual averment that petitioner has "no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law," and seek the mandate of this court to compel performance upon the part of the clerk.
The records and files of the court are required to be kept in the clerk's office, in his custody, and he is responsible for them. Or. L. §§ 590, 591.
"At common law no person is entitled to inspect public records, either personally or by agent, or to make copies, abstracts, or memoranda therefrom, unless he has such an interest therein as would enable him to maintain or defend an action for which the record sought can be furnished as evidence or necessary information, and the interest of the person demanding the inspection must be direct and tangible." 34 Cyc. 592, 593.
The defendant grounds his refusal to submit the records to the petitioner's representatives on a statute that is in substanial accord with the common law, and which was adopted as a part of the Civil Code on October 11, 1862. That statute provides:
Or. L. § 592.
At this point, it should be noted that, in many states, the common law has been modified by statute. In our own jurisdiction, 47 years after the enactment of the statute hereinabove quoted, the Legislative Assembly enacted chapter 98 of the General Laws of Oregon 1909, entitled:
"An act to provide for the free inspection of all state, county, school, city, and town records or files by all persons; and for the making of abstracts or memoranda therefrom."
It will be observed that the subject of the act expressly declares its purpose to be to provide for the inspection "of all state" and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
MacEwan v. Holm
...required to be kept or made by a public official unless the statute specially provides otherwise.' See also, Bend Publishing Co. v. Haner, 1926, 118 Or. 105, 244 P. 868. It is not contended in the present case that plaintiff's purpose in seeking information from the records was 'unlawful.' ......
-
Doe v. Corp. of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
...records. Id. at 405–06, 711 P.2d 966 (citing MacEwan v. Holm et al., 226 Or. 27, 35, 359 P.2d 413 (1961); Bend Publishing Co. v. Haner, 118 Or. 105, 107, 244 P. 868 (1926)). The court in Bend Publishing Co. also concluded that an applicable statute granted the plaintiff a right to inspect a......
-
Papadopoulos v. State Bd. of Higher Educ.
...This 1909 statute was the predecessor of the present statute, ORS 192.030. The 1909 statute was interpreted in Bend Publishing Co. v. Haner, 118 Or. 105, 244 P. 868 (1926). That case upheld the right of a newspaper publisher to have access to the records and files of the county and circuit ......
-
Holcombe v. State ex rel. Chandler
...... by the writ of mandamus. * * *". . . A. similar case is Bend Publishing Co. v. Haner, 118. Or. 105, 108, 109, 244 P. 868, 869, which is, likewise, a. ......