Kowitz v. Van Winkle

299 P. 1017, 136 Or. 711, 1931 Ore. LEXIS 138
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedMay 26, 1931
StatusPublished

This text of 299 P. 1017 (Kowitz v. Van Winkle) 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
Kowitz v. Van Winkle, 299 P. 1017, 136 Or. 711, 1931 Ore. LEXIS 138 (Or. 1931).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from ballot title prepared by the Attorney General, which this day has been considered in opinion in McDonald v Van Winkle et al. On oral argument the petitioner confessed that he had no objection to the ballot title filed by the Attorney General and that the only purpose of this proceeding was to obtain a ruling by this court as to the sufficiency of the ballot title. Under the circumstances, there will be no consideration of the objections set out in the petition.

It follows that the demurrer to the petition is sustained and the ballot titles as prepared by the Attorney General are hereby certified to the secretary of state.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
299 P. 1017, 136 Or. 711, 1931 Ore. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kowitz-v-van-winkle-or-1931.