Legal Opinion

Doerfler v. Richman

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 6, 1935PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRand, J.

In this suit the plaintiffs are seeking to reform and foreclose a real estate mortgage which erroneously described the property intended to be mortgaged as a part of section 26, township 17 south, range 4 west, W. M., whereas it was located in section 23 of said township and range. The description of the mortgaged property as contained in the mortgage is as follows:

“Beginning at a point on the north line of Lot 1, Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 4 West of the Willamette Meridian, Oregon, 16.256 chains West of the Northwest corner of the Solomon Zumwalt Donation Land Claim No. 41, in said…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Curtis v. GoodingIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Quivey v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Conyers v. MericlesIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  4. McGehee v. Lehman, Durr &Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1880
  5. Blodgett v. HobartSupreme Court of Vermont · 1846

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. De Tweede Northwestern & Pacific Hypotheekbank v. W. M. Barnett EstateOregon Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Troubled Asset Solutions v. WilcherCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API