Matter of Title, Ballot Title 1997-98 No. 30

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that because the initiative encompassed more than one subject, the court need not address the additional challenges to the initiative
• explaining that because the initiative encompassed more than one subject, the court did not need to address the additional challenges to the initiative
• noting that “[t]he risk of ‘uninformed voting caused by items concealed within a lengthy or complex proposal’ is what the single subject requirement seeks to avoid” (quoting “Public Rights in Waters II”, 898 P.2d at 1079)
• explaining that the revenue limitations and spending limitations under Amendment 1 operate independently
• stating that general rules of statutory construction apply to interpretation of citizen-initiated measures
• holding that voter surprise or fraud would result if the initiative passed because voters could be enticed to vote for the measure in order to enact a substantial tax cut while not realizing that passage of the measure would simultaneously achieve a purpose not necessarily related to a tax cut

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).