CITY OF SALEM v. KIMBALL, Or. Ct. App., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mike Dye, Salem, argued the cause for
With him on the brief were Kleen Dye,
William G. Blair, Assistant City Attorney, Salem, argued the cause for
With him on the brief was William J. Juza, City Attorney,

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mike Dye, Salem, argued the cause for
With him on the brief were Kleen Dye,
William G. Blair, Assistant City Attorney, Salem, argued the cause for
With him on the brief was William J. Juza, City Attorney,

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

CITY OF SALEM, Respondent, v. ARLO WILLIAM KIMBALL, Appellant.

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

This appeal involved violation of a city ordinance. Oral argument confirmed the fact that the appeal did not involve an issue as to "* * * the constitutionality of the charter provision or ordinance under which the conviction was obtained * * *." ORS 221.360. Therefore, in view of ORS 221.350 and 221.360, we ruled from the bench that this case be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

This matter could have been more expeditiously and less expensively handled by a motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction prior to the filing of briefs.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

CITY OF SALEM v. KIMBALL

CITY OF SALEM, Respondent, v. ARLO WILLIAM KIMBALL, Appellant.

Comments