Multnomah County v. Sliker

10 Or. 65
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 10 Or. 65 (Multnomah County v. Sliker) 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
Multnomah County v. Sliker, 10 Or. 65 (Or. 1881).

Opinion

By the Court,

Lord, C. J.:

The facts in this case are stipulated, and involve the identical question decided by this court in the case of East Portland v. Multnomah County, (6 Or. R., 64,) and subsequently, the principle on which the decision in that case proceeded, was re-examined and re-affirmed in the case of the City of Astoria v. Clatsop County, not reported for the reason that the question presented in the two cases were identical. It will thus be seen that the subject matter of this action has already received a careful and thorough investigation from the court, and ample opportunity has been afforded for the correction of any error into which the court might have fallen in the original decision. It is now brought the third time before us on briefs which cite no [66]*66authorities, and suggest no reasons which have not already-been considered by the court, or which show that the original case was decided contrary to principle. The matter here is the constitutionality of a statute, and the rule is said to be almost universal that in construing statutes and the constitution, to adhere to the doctrine of stcwe decisis. (Seale v. Michell, 5 Cal., 481.) Certainly courts naturally feel reluctant to depart from a decision which has been recognized by subsequent cases, unless error is plainly shown to exist, conceding even that a different conclusion might be reached, if the question presented were an open one. ~We have carefully examined the reasons on which the decision in East Portland v. Multnomah County is based and, as at present advised, reaffirm it by affirming the decision in this case. So it is ordered.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Holbert v. Noon
260 P.3d 836 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2011)
Walton v. Thompson
102 P.3d 687 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2004)
Kambury v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
21 P.3d 1089 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2001)
Fred Meyer, Inc. v. Bundy
978 P.2d 385 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1999)
Newell v. Weston
965 P.2d 1039 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1998)
Mrs. Smith's West Coast Pie Co. v. Department of Revenue
4 Or. Tax 398 (Oregon Tax Court, 1971)
State Ex Rel. Harth v. Phipps
299 P. 1009 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1931)
State v. Olcott
187 P. 286 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1920)
State v. Port of Astoria
154 P. 399 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1916)
Salt Lake City v. Wilson
148 P. 1104 (Utah Supreme Court, 1915)
Kalich v. Knapp
142 P. 594 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1914)
Yocom v. City of Sheridan
137 P. 222 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
Johnson v. Jackson County
136 P. 874 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
State v. McAllister
136 P. 354 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
Putnam v. Pacific Monthly Co.
130 P. 986 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
Yamhill County v. Foster
99 P. 286 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1909)
Huddleston v. City of Eugene
43 L.R.A. 444 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1899)
Oregon City v. Moore
46 P. 1017 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Or. 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/multnomah-county-v-sliker-or-1881.