Hawley v. Anderson
| Decision Date | 08 February 1921 |
| Citation | 99 Or. 191,195 P. 358 |
| Parties | HAWLEY v. ANDERSON, COUNTY JUDGE, ET AL. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
In Banc.
On rehearing. Former judgment and opinion set aside, and dissenting opinion, 190 P. 1097, adopted as the opinion of the court.
O. D. Eby, of Oregon City, for plaintiff.
Gilbert L. Hedges, of Oregon City, for defendants.
A full statement of the points involved in this case will be found in 190 P. 1097. At that hearing a majority of this court held the opinion that the demurrer to the writ should be sustained and the proceeding dismissed, and it was so ordered. Subsequently and within the term a motion was filed to set aside the order and grant a rehearing, which was done, and the case was submitted for rehearing upon the briefs previously filed.
Subsequent to the order first mentioned we had occasion in the case of Ladd & Tilton Bank v. Frawley, 193 P. 916, to re-examine the questions passed upon in the instant case, and a majority of the court was of the opinion there that the constitutional amendment of 1919 contained a sufficient grant of power to authorize a county to proceed with an election for the authorization of an issue of bonds to raise money to be expended in the construction and maintenance of permanent roads, and that an election for that purpose, so long as the proposed issue was not in excess of 6 per cent. of the assessed valuation of the property in the county, was valid without any further legislation. This conclusion necessarily requires a reconsideration of our previous decision in the instant case, and the minority opinion rendered in this case upon the previous hearing is now held to be a correct exposition of the constitutional provisions involved in the present litigation. Our previous judgment is therefore set aside, and an order will be entered overruling the demurrer to the writ and directing the defendant to make delivery of the bonds bid for by plaintiff, upon the payment by him of the amount bid therefor.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Kuhnhausen
...is entitled to serious consideration by the courts, though it is not binding upon them. Hawley v. Anderson, 99 Or. 191, 190 P. 1097, 195 P. 358; Walker v. Polk County, 110 Or. 535, 223 P. 741. In State v. McGowan, 113 Mont. 591, 131 P.2d 262, 264, the Montana court quoted language from 22 C......
-
Green v. United States, 7215.
...v. McRae, 182 N. C. 747, 110 S. E. 102; Ladd & Tilton Bank v. Frawley, 98 Or. 241, 193 P. 916; Hawley v. Anderson, 99 Or. 191, 190 P. 1097, 195 P. 358; State v. Hecker, 109 Or. 520, 221 P. 808; Commonwealth v. Brennan, 258 Pa. 1, 101 A. 947; Duncan Township v. Stayr, 106 Wash. 514, 180 P. 4......
-
Hansen v. Malheur County
...their wish that the debt limit be increased. 8. In the original opinion of this court in Hawley v. Anderson, 99 Or. 191, 190 P. 1097, 195 P. 358, it was held that an election authorizing the issuance of in excess of the legal limit did not permit the issuance of bonds up to that limit, sinc......
-
State v. De Ford
...of the Constitution, and is entitled to great weight in the construction of that statute. Hawley v. Anderson, 99 Or. 191, 208, 190 P. 1097, 195 P. 358; C.J. 714, § 65 (2). In the instant case the sheriff gave instructions to search the car. The sheriff acted through his deputies, and their ......