Court Opinion

ID: 9624006
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:48:39.21546+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:37.657037
License: Public Domain

On Petition eor Rehearing
Before Lusk, Chief Justice, and Brand, Belt,* Rossman, Hat, and Latourette, Justices.
Denied.
*505HAY, J.
 The plaintiffs, who are appellants and cross respondents, have filed a petition for rehearing in this case based upon the asserted grounds (1) that the court erred in holding that there was evidence that fish traps take not only salmon but smaller fish which are usually not taken in gill-netting operations, and, (2) that we erred in holding that the evidence does not conclusively show that the initiative act fails to meet the test of reasonableness, and that, therefore, the presumption in favor of reasonableness should prevail.
Although no brief accompanied the petition, we have re-examined our opinion in these respects, and are satisfied that the petition is not well-founded. It is therefore denied.
In our opinion in this case we said that the cause would be remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent therewith. Upon further consideration we have concluded, in the state of the record, that a remand for further proceedings would be inappropriate. The cause will therefore be remanded with directions that it be dismissed.