Opinion

Application of Oklahoma Turnpike Authority

  • 203 Okla. 335
  • 221 P.2d 795
  • 1950 OK 208
  • 1950 Okla. LEXIS 612
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Jul 21, 1950
Status
Published
Author
Gibson
On the bench
Arnold, Corn, Davison, Gibson, Halley, Johnson, Luttrell, O'Neal, Welch
Cited by
53 cases

finding that the Authority's enabling act was not a special law, did not violate the single subject rule, was not enacted in excess of the Legislature's constitutional authority, and that any bonds issued by the Authority were not obligations of the State

How later courts described this case

  • finding that the Authority's enabling act was not a special law, did not violate the single subject rule, was not enacted in excess of the Legislature's constitutional authority, and that any bonds issued by the Authority were not obligations of the State

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

*355 GIBSON, J.

(dissenting). Since is it charged by the protestants and admitted by the Turnpike Authority that the toll road to be constructed with the proceeds of the bond issue will not extend throughout the distance between Oklahoma City and the city of Tulsa, the termini prescribed by the Act, and that the Authority will not at its expense provide said cities with access thereto, I am of the opinion that for that reason alone, even if there were no others, approval of the bonds should be withheld.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.