Springfield Milling Company vs Lane County
From Lane Co Oregon
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''That doctrine had the approval of this court in [[Springfield Milling Company|Springfield Milling Co.]] v. Lane County, 5 Or. 265. The court there said: "This rule may sometimes work a hardship upon a contractor, who, without having considered whether the law has been complied with or not, has performed labor or furnished material for a public corporation, and expects compensation therefor, the same as if it had been done or furnished for a private individual. But nevertheless the authorities hold that a contractor, no less than the officers of a municipal corporation, when dealing in a matter expressly provided by law. must see to it that the law is complied with. Where work is done without authority upon the streets of a city, liability does not follow because the streets may be improved thereby or their use continued. Such continued use constitutes no such evidence of acceptance as to create a liability against the corporation." The financial condition of our cities is bad enough now, and if their officers are allowed loose rein to engage in enterprises and create obligations against them without regard to restrictions as to the mode of procedure to be pursued, irretrievable bankruptcy and ruin will certainly follow.'' | ''That doctrine had the approval of this court in [[Springfield Milling Company|Springfield Milling Co.]] v. Lane County, 5 Or. 265. The court there said: "This rule may sometimes work a hardship upon a contractor, who, without having considered whether the law has been complied with or not, has performed labor or furnished material for a public corporation, and expects compensation therefor, the same as if it had been done or furnished for a private individual. But nevertheless the authorities hold that a contractor, no less than the officers of a municipal corporation, when dealing in a matter expressly provided by law. must see to it that the law is complied with. Where work is done without authority upon the streets of a city, liability does not follow because the streets may be improved thereby or their use continued. Such continued use constitutes no such evidence of acceptance as to create a liability against the corporation." The financial condition of our cities is bad enough now, and if their officers are allowed loose rein to engage in enterprises and create obligations against them without regard to restrictions as to the mode of procedure to be pursued, irretrievable bankruptcy and ruin will certainly follow.'' | ||
| - | "Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon" | + | "Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon" By Oregon Supreme Court, of W.W. Thayer, Chief Justice. The Supreme Court of the State of Oregon, during the March Term, 1889, October Term, 1889, and March Term, 1890. Volume 18. San Francisco: Bancroft-Whitney Company, 1890. p. 46. |
| - | + | ||
[[Category:Lane County legal cases]] | [[Category:Lane County legal cases]] | ||
Revision as of 21:14, 9 August 2007
That doctrine had the approval of this court in Springfield Milling Co. v. Lane County, 5 Or. 265. The court there said: "This rule may sometimes work a hardship upon a contractor, who, without having considered whether the law has been complied with or not, has performed labor or furnished material for a public corporation, and expects compensation therefor, the same as if it had been done or furnished for a private individual. But nevertheless the authorities hold that a contractor, no less than the officers of a municipal corporation, when dealing in a matter expressly provided by law. must see to it that the law is complied with. Where work is done without authority upon the streets of a city, liability does not follow because the streets may be improved thereby or their use continued. Such continued use constitutes no such evidence of acceptance as to create a liability against the corporation." The financial condition of our cities is bad enough now, and if their officers are allowed loose rein to engage in enterprises and create obligations against them without regard to restrictions as to the mode of procedure to be pursued, irretrievable bankruptcy and ruin will certainly follow.
"Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon" By Oregon Supreme Court, of W.W. Thayer, Chief Justice. The Supreme Court of the State of Oregon, during the March Term, 1889, October Term, 1889, and March Term, 1890. Volume 18. San Francisco: Bancroft-Whitney Company, 1890. p. 46.
