Legal Opinion

Bronson v. Purcell

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 8, 1989No. 88-CV-0171-TM; CA A60472PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Plaintiffs brought this action to recover damages from defendant Purcell1 for a “secret profit” that he allegedly received from the buyer in a real property transaction in which Purcell and plaintiffs or their predecessors, as joint venturers, were the sellers. Shortly before trial, the trial court refused plaintiffs’ demand to empanel a jury, because it concluded that plaintiffs’ fourth amended complaint “does not disclose that the affairs of the alleged joint venture have been closed” and, therefore, that the case is “in the nature of a proceeding for an accounting,” triable to the court.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kelly v. TracyOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Sproul v. FossiOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Davis v. TadevicCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  4. Moffatt v. HardenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Thompson v. CoughlinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API