Douglas County Road Co. v. County of Douglas

Oregon Supreme Court

Douglas County Road Co. v. County of Douglas

5 Or. 373

CourtOregon Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 15, 1875

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 5 Or. 373 (Douglas County Road Co. v. County of Douglas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Douglas County Road Co. v. County of Douglas, 5 Or. 373 (Or. 1875).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Shattuck, J.:

This suit, coming before the Court upon complaint and demurrer, presents the same question decided by this Court at [374]*374the December Term, 1874, in the case of The Douglas County Road Company v. Abrahams et al.,—whether the alleged contract or agreement between the County Court of Douglas County, and the Douglas County Boad Company, of date April 10, 1874, is enforceable, or can be made available in the form and condition in which the record' of the County Court of Douglas County, relating to the matter, has been left—and, though all the members of the Court, in that case, did not concur in the decision and opinion given, yet that decision must stand as the decision of the Court, and, so far as the two cases are similar, must control this- case.

There are added, however, in this case, allegations concerning the proceedings in the County Court of Douglas County, upon which the Circuit Court was asked to exercise a supervisory control over the County Court by injunction, and by decree, in the nature of specific performance. It is not pretended that if the appellant’s contract had been duly recorded, and a record of its authorization duly made in the County Court, the proceeding for injunction against the rival company (the Galesville and Canyonville Boad Company), might not be sustained, no valid defense on other grounds being made; and it was more than intimated by this Court, in the case above alluded to, at the December Term, 1874, that the proper remedy for the party, if there was any at all, was some proceeding to have the record of the County Court completed.

This cannot be done by injunction, or suit in equity. The supervisory control exercised by the Circuit Court, as a general rule, is to be exercised by mandamus, the writ of review, or an appeal; and this case furnishes no exception to this general rule.

We think the decree of the Circuit Court should be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court,

Shattuck, J.:

This suit, coming before the Court upon complaint and demurrer, presents the same question decided by this Court at [374]*374the December Term, 1874, in the case of The Douglas County Road Company v. Abrahams et al.,—whether the alleged contract or agreement between the County Court of Douglas County, and the Douglas County Boad Company, of date April 10, 1874, is enforceable, or can be made available in the form and condition in which the record' of the County Court of Douglas County, relating to the matter, has been left—and, though all the members of the Court, in that case, did not concur in the decision and opinion given, yet that decision must stand as the decision of the Court, and, so far as the two cases are similar, must control this- case.

There are added, however, in this case, allegations concerning the proceedings in the County Court of Douglas County, upon which the Circuit Court was asked to exercise a supervisory control over the County Court by injunction, and by decree, in the nature of specific performance. It is not pretended that if the appellant’s contract had been duly recorded, and a record of its authorization duly made in the County Court, the proceeding for injunction against the rival company (the Galesville and Canyonville Boad Company), might not be sustained, no valid defense on other grounds being made; and it was more than intimated by this Court, in the case above alluded to, at the December Term, 1874, that the proper remedy for the party, if there was any at all, was some proceeding to have the record of the County Court completed.

This cannot be done by injunction, or suit in equity. The supervisory control exercised by the Circuit Court, as a general rule, is to be exercised by mandamus, the writ of review, or an appeal; and this case furnishes no exception to this general rule.

We think the decree of the Circuit Court should be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Or. 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglas-county-road-co-v-county-of-douglas-or-1875.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack