Legal Opinion

Durnford v. Worden

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1966PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolman, J.

Plaintiff brought .an action for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident between vehicles driven by plaintiff and defendant. Hpon trial the jury returned a verdict for defendant. Plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial which was granted by the trial court. Defendant has appealed from the order granting a new trial.

The two vehicles were traveling in opposite directions on a graveled county road. They met on a sharp, steep, blind curve. It was an inside right-hand downhill curve for plaintiff and an outside, left-hand, uphill curve for defendant. There were three tire tracks…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fenton v. AleshireOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Frangos v. EdmundsOregon Supreme Court · 1946
  3. Hills v. McGillvreyOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Anderson v. Wallowa National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Bailey v. OppOregon Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Holger v. IrishOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Lundquist v. IrvineOregon Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Lane v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Bjorndal v. WeitmanOregon Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Holger v. IrishOregon Supreme Court · 1993

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

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

Powered by the Exa API