# State Ex Rel. Oregon Consumer League v. Zielinski

> Court of Appeals of Oregon · December 15, 1982 · 60 Or. App. 654

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9605336

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE Ex Rel OREGON CONSUMER LEAGUE Et Al, Appellants, v. ZIELINSKI, Respondent
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Oregon
- **Decided:** December 15, 1982
- **Citations:** 60 Or. App. 654; 654 P.2d 1161; 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 4144
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Van Hoomissen
- **Judges:** Van Hoomissen, Thornton, Van Hoomissen Rossman, Rossman
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9605336

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the standards set out in statute were “sufficiently definite to permit judicial inquiry into the validity of defendant’s appointment as one of the two consumer representatives on the State Board of Agriculture”

## Opinion text

VAN HOOMISSEN, J.,
specially concurring.
I concur in the result.
In enacting ORS 561.130 the legislature intended to identify two distinct interest groups whose representatives would establish policy for the Department of Agriculture, i.e., agricultural producers and consumer representatives. Defendant so patently falls within the former group that for us to hold she may serve in a position reserved for the latter is to ascribe to the legislature an intention to make meaningless any distinction between the groups. The legislature could not have intended such a result.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9605336. Public record. Not legal advice.