Handy v. Beck
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*655JOSEPH, J.,
Pro Tempore.
In this fraud action, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment entered for the defendant after a trial to the court.
In 1970, plaintiffs’ predecessors in interest had a water well drilled by defendant, who operated a drilling business in an informal partnership with his sons. State regulations required that domestic water wells be cased to a depth of 18 feet and sealed. OAR 71-006; 71-008; 71.010. The defendant’s sons, who did the actual work, mostly without participation by the defendant, installed only eight and one-half feet of casing and an insufficient amount of sealing.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- MacEwan v. HOLMOregon Supreme Court · 1961
- Bodenhamer v. PattersonOregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Rice v. McAlisterOregon Supreme Court · 1974
- Wheelwright v. VanderbiltOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- Menefee v. BlitzOregon Supreme Court · 1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Ernst & Young, L.L.P. v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2001
- Strawn v. Farmers Ins. Co. of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2011
- Woodward v. DietrichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Barnhouse v. City of PinoleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- prod.liab.rep.(cch)p 12,456 Learjet Corporation v. Robert SpenlinhauerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.