[DOWNLOAD] "Red River Const. Co. v. City of Norman" by In the Court of Appeals of the State of Oregon # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Red River Const. Co. v. City of Norman
- Author : In the Court of Appeals of the State of Oregon
- Release Date : January 24, 1981
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 65 KB
Description
1 This action was commenced in the District Court of Cleveland County by the Red River Construction Company in August of 1978, against the city of Norman and the members of the City Council of that city. The city of Norman attempted to remove the action to federal court and the cause was remanded to state court in September of the same year. Plaintiffs allegations established it was the owner of a lease for the purpose of mining riverbed sand at the southern end of the city of Normans street called 24th Avenue S.W., on the north bank of the Canadian River, and that 24th Street is the sole and only route or way which the Red River Construction Company has to transport the mined sand into commerce. Further, plaintiff stated in its petition the citizens of the city have objected to the use of the named street as a thoroughfare for its sand trucks. Pursuant to the objections of the towns citizens, the governing body considered an ordinance explicitly designed to prohibit sand trucks from traveling on the street. Later this weight limit ordinance, 0-7879-2, was passed. Plaintiff denied the ordinance was adopted to protect the public welfare, protect the street, regulate weights or other lawful purposes but was passed "to belay and satisfy the complaints of property owners living along said street." Plaintiffs petition further pled that if the ordinance was allowed to take effect plaintiffs business will necessarily be closed, and the plaintiff will be deprived of property rights without due process guaranteed under the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 2, Sec. 23 of the Constitution of Oklahoma. The plaintiff sought an injunction restraining enforcement of the ordinance and sought damages under 42 U.S.C. ? 1983: