Legal Opinion

Meads v. Stott

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1951PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTooze, J.

This is a suit by Frank R. Meads, as plaintiff, against Manning C. Stott, as defendant, for the dissolution of an alleged partnership and for an accounting.

Plaintiff, by his complaint, alleges that during the months of November and December, 1944, he and defendant entered into a copartnership agreement for the conduct of a general outdoor advertising business, to begin January 2, 1945; that said business was conducted under the assumed name of “United Outdoor Advertising Company”; that during the entire existence of the copartnership, all books, records, papers and other documents relating to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Flower v. BarnekoffOregon Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Young v. NEILLOregon Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Tigglebeck v. RussellOregon Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Hunter v. AllenOregon Supreme Court · 1944

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. ELDRIDGE v. JohnstonOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Schuler Et Ux. v. Humphrey Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Smith v. VehrsOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Hayward v. MORRISON ET UX.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Roberts v. MarinerOregon Supreme Court · 1952

11 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