American Oil Pump & Tank Co. v. Foust
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.
1, 2. There was a controversy in the evidence as to whether the Anchor Sales Company was the vendor of this equipment, and installed it as such; or, whether it was the agent of the plaintiff, and acted in this representative capacity in making the sale and the installation. Each party offered substantial evidence in support of its contention. The court in ruling upon the admissibility of this evidence, received three letters, offered by the defendant, written by himself to, and received by the plaintiff. These letters constituted a portion of the correspondence that passed between the parties…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- California Press Manufacturing Co. v. Stafford Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
- Feeney & Bremer Co. v. StoneOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Poland v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Benton v. J. A. Fay & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1872
- Hitchcock v. HuntSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Brown v. J. C. Penney Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1984
- Western Feed Co. v. HeidloffOregon Supreme Court · 1962
- Sproul v. FossiOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Gallagher v. Portland Traction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1947
- State v. McCoyOregon Supreme Court · 1974
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.