Legal Opinion

Rugh v. Ottenheimer

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1877PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Appeal from Baker County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Boise, J.:

This suit is in the nature of a cross-bill to an action of ejectment. It is claimed in the complaint that on the eleventh day of October, 1857, the plaintiff was married to *232one "William C. Rugh, whose wife she now is: 2. That on the * * day of August, 1856, the plaintiff, then a feme sole, purchased of one Daniel Sebastion a farm of one hundred and sixty acres of land situated in Washington county in this state; 3. That about the first day of March, 1869, plaintiff made a contract with one Nelson Gardner, whereby it rvas agreed that said land in Washington county…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Whitehead v. . WhiteheadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Peery v. FletcherOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Li v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 2005
  3. ACME Dairy Co. v. AstoriaOregon Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Springer v. JenkinsOregon Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Rose v. RoseCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898

20 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