Kane v. Forbes
This text of 909 P.2d 160 (Kane v. Forbes) 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.
Opinion
This proceeding is brought to challenge the constitutionality of the light rail funding provisions of Senate Bill 1156, enacted by the Oregon legislature in special session in August 1995. In McIntire v. Forbes, 322 Or 426, 909 P2d 846 (1996), this court has held that sections 1 to 17 of SB 1156 are invalid because of a violation of the “one-subject” requirement in Article IV, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution. Petitioner in this case raises that claim, among others. Accordingly, our decision in this case is governed by our decision in Mclntire.
Sections 1 to 17 of SB 1156 are declared void.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
909 P.2d 160, 322 Or. 447, 1996 Ore. LEXIS 3, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kane-v-forbes-or-1996.