Legal Opinion

Logan v. Illinois Rivers Development Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1929PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, C. J.

Defendant’s first point is that questions of fact cannot be tried on a motion for judgment on the pleadings: Smith v. Aplanalp, 126 Or. 213 (267 Pac. 1070); Oregon & Western Colonization Co. v. Willoughby, 122 Or. 170 (257 Pac. 812). If there is an issue of fact joined in the pleadings, the decree on the pleadings was improper. Appellant claims that the provision in the decree for attorney’s fee is improper because there is no issue joined on that question. For that reason there is no issue of fact involved. Conceding, without deciding, that the court erred in providing for attorney’s fee in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Graham v. MerchantOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Neppach v. Oregon & Cal. RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Gray v. PeltonOregon Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Kingsley v. KresslyOregon Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Merrill v. HexterOregon Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Logan Et Ux. v. Illinois River Dev. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Logan Et Ux. v. Illinois River Dev. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API