Legal Opinion

L. B. Menefee Lumber Co. v. MacDonald

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 23, 1927PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

The question arises whether the allegations of the counterclaim are sufficient to state the cause of action which the court submitted to the jury. Defendants suggest that we omit all portions of the counterclaim referring to conversion as surplusage, and that enough will remain to state a cause of action in assumpsit based upon a sale of merchandise. As suggested in defendants’ brief, the counterclaim will read as follows:

“That on or between the 31st day of August, 1923, and the first day of April, 1924, the plaintiff took and received 524,899 feet of lumber, the property of and belonging to…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Lent v. New York & Massachusetts Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Greentree v. . RosenstockNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  3. Oolitic Stone Co. v. RidgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Rogers v. DuhartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Chicago, Terre Haute & Southeastern Railway Co. v. CollinsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1924

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Wagner v. Savage, as Adm'rOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Ritchie v. THOMASOregon Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Watkins v. Siler Logging Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Keegan v. LenzieOregon Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Denton v. DetweilerIdaho Supreme Court · 1929

21 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