enjoining horse racing under nuisance law “operates not to deprive an owner of his property in the constitutional sense . . . and though such action may impair the value of the property, it is not for that reason obnoxious to constitutional guaranties”
How later courts described this case
- enjoining horse racing under nuisance law “operates not to deprive an owner of his property in the constitutional sense . . . and though such action may impair the value of the property, it is not for that reason obnoxious to constitutional guaranties”
- "In its elementary sense the word `or' is a disjunctive particle that marks an alternative, generally corresponding to `either,' as `either this or that'... . It often connects a series of words or propositions, presenting a choice of either."
- “[T]he word ‘or’ is usually, if not always, construed judicially as a disjunctive unless it becomes necessary in order to conform to the clear intention of the Legislature to construe it conjunctively as meaning ‘and.’ ”
- there are instances in which conjunctive "or" is equivalent to copulative conjunction "and"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Buford, J.,
Dissenting:
In this case Mr. Chief Justice Ellis has prepared to be filed herein a statement of the grounds upon which he dissents from the majority opinion. The grounds as stated by Mr. Chief Justice Ellis are numbered by him from First to Tenth, inclusive.
I concur in the views expressed by Mr. Chief Justice Ellis as set forth in the sub-divisions of his statement marked Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eight, Ninth and, Tenth and therefore, must dissent from the majority opinion.