Legal Opinion

Drake v. Riley

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1932PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

Plaintiff claims a lien for material furnished in the construction of a building and a dam intended to be used for the purposes of a fish hatchery.

When the work upon this hatchery was abandoned, is one of the questions involved herein. Mr. John Francisco, a witness in behalf of the appealing defendants, testified that he was working for A. 0. Riley, one of the defendants, until about the 15th of December, and that he saw Earl Smith working there “sometime the first of December, first week of December, maybe the 4th or 5th somewhere.” Defendant Riley was unable to state when the work ceased.

R.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Christman v. SalwayOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Springer Land Assn. v. FordSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. Oregon Lumber & Fuel Co. v. NolanOregon Supreme Court · 1914
  4. James A. C. Tait & Co. v. StrykerOregon Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Nicolai-Neppach Co. v. PooreOregon Supreme Court · 1926

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Barr v. LynchOregon Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Erne v. Goshen Veneer, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Bradfield v. BollierOregon Supreme Court · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API