Legal Opinion

Bratt v. State Industrial Accident Commission

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 9, 1925PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, J.

— At the time the claim was pending in the Circuit Court the following rule, made by that court, was in full force and effect:

“Rule 13 — Setting Cases for Trial.
“(a) Whenever a case is at issue, the clerk shall immediately notify the court, whereupon the court will, at the next calendar day, call up and set the same for trial at any vacant date on any calendar, endeavoring to suit the convenience of all parties.
“ (b) Whenever a case is set the attorneys for each party shall be notified by postal card by the clerk unless they were present at the time of setting the case for trial.”

This rule…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Thompson v. ConnellOregon Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Hughes v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1858
  3. Coyote G. & S. M. Co. v. RubleOregon Supreme Court · 1881
  4. In re RiggsOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Schnitzer v. SteinOregon Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Dimitroff v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Simpson v. WinegarOregon Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Snyder v. Consolidated Highway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Peters v. DietrichOregon Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Hart v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1934

10 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