Kaylor v. Recla
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBean, C. J.
We therefore have for consideration the question of the sufficiency of the complaint to state a cause of suit. Of course on demurrer we must assume that the allegations of the complaint are true. The amended complaint, in substance, alleges that the plaintiffs, George W. Kaylor and A. S. King, are the equitable owners and in possession of certain lands described in the complaint; that said lands are adapted to the growing of alfalfa, cereal grains and other profit able agricultural crops, and have been continuously so used by plaintiffs for many years immediately preceding this suit, and are…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Fleming v. LockwoodMontana Supreme Court · 1907
- Tormey v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Howell v. Big Horn Basin Colonization Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1905
- Parker v. LarsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Patterson v. Horsefly Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1937
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Schweiger v. SolbeckOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Furrer v. Talent Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1970
- Ure v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1950
- Albrethson v. Carey Valley Reservoir Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1947
- Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. Vale, Oregon Irrigation Dist.District Court, D. Oregon · 1966
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.