Legal Opinion

Trutch v. Bunnell

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1883PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Aiuucal from Multnomah County.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Waldo, J.:

This is a suit to foreclose a mortgage of the north half of block 8 in the city of Portland. The property belonged to minors, and was mortgaged by their guardian, acting under the order of the county court of Multnomah county, to secure the payment of a promissory note for $12,000, dated December 1, 1873. Said note was signed “D. D. Bunnell, guardian of Mezaldus Scott, Fred Scott, Melvern Scott, *59Oceana Scott and Robert Scott, minors and wards of said guardian.”

This same mortgage was before this court in Trutch v. Bunnell, 5 Or., 504. It is now conceded that there was no…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Carroll v. Lessee of CarrollSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
  2. Phelps v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  3. Coutant v. ServossNew York Supreme Court · 1848
  4. Stokes v. Payne, Kennedy & Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Cunningham v. PitzerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1867

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. ReiffWashington Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Wright v. AtwoodIdaho Supreme Court · 1921
  3. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. NaylorCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916
  4. Wilson v. HubbardWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Davidson v. WamplerMontana Supreme Court · 1903

7 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