Legal Opinion

Galvin v. MacKenzie

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 26, 1891PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtLoud, J.

This is an action to recover money upon an oral agreement to furnish the defendant two dresses,’and for which she was to pay the several sums specified when completed.

The answer of the defendant alleges that the dresses were misfits, and that they were never received and accepted by her, which is denied in the reply.

On the trial, as the agreement was oral, the defendant relied upon the statute of frauds to exclude the testimony *185for the plaintiff, and also after the plaintiff rested, moved for a nonsuit for the same reason, which the court overruled on the ground that there was some evidence…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Shindler v. . HoustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
  2. Garfield v. ParisSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  3. Stone v. . BrowningNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  4. Remick v. SandfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
  5. H. C. Redington & Co. v. RobertsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Ft. Dodge Electric Light & Power Co. v. City of Ft. DodgeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
  2. Howland v. Iron Fireman Manufacturing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Howland v. Iron Fireman Mfg. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Coffin v. BradburyIdaho Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Brown v. SheedyOregon Supreme Court · 1918

4 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