# Holmes v. Appling

> Oregon Supreme Court · May 25, 1964 · 237 Or. 546

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9848759

## Case

- **Full name:** HOLMES Et Al v. APPLING
- **Court:** Oregon Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 25, 1964
- **Citations:** 237 Or. 546; 392 P.2d 636; 1964 Ore. LEXIS 390
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Denecke
- **Judges:** McAllister, Rossman, Perry, Sloan, Denecke, Lusk, Warner
- **Cited by:** 18 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/9848759

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that judicial review of the nature of the initiative was permissible

## Opinion text

DENECKE, J.,
specially concurring.
I concur in the majority opinion except for that part of the opinion which suggests that the petition submitted to the Secretary of 'State contains a “new constitution” and only can be proposed by a constitutional convention.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9848759. Public record. Not legal advice.