Barron v. Duke
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.
At the close of plaintiff’s testimony in chief the defendants moved for a nonsuit and at the close of all of the testimony the defendants requested the court to withdraw from the jury the question of permanent injuries for the reason that there was no testimony tending to show that either of the plaintiffs was permanently injured, and requested a directed verdict for the defendants. For the same reason the defendants allege error of the trial court in charging the jury as follows:
“In the case of Leona J. Barron and J. J. Barron against the defendants for recovery of personal injuries, in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Strohm v. . the N.Y., L.E. W.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Hines v. DeanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Rugenstein v. OttenheimerOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- State v. BertschingerOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- Cross v. . City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Jordan v. BeroWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1974
- Zehr v. HaugenOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Feist v. Sears, Roebuck & CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Reid v. Yellow Cab Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
- Austin v. Portland Traction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1947
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.