Legal Opinion

DEAN VINCENT, INC. v. Redisco, Inc.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided August 14, 1962PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGoodwin, J.

This is a contest for priority between secured creditors. It arises out of the building of an apartment house. The plaintiff holds a first mortgage on the real property. The defendant Eedisco, Inc., holds a conditional -sales contract and a second mortgage for the price of the floor coverings and the installation charges therefor. From a decree according priority to the plaintiff’s mortgage, Eedisco appeals.

There were a number of other parties and issues in the suit, but they are all peripheral to the question presented here. The first question is whether installed wall-to-wall carpeting can…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Roseburg Nat. Bank v. CampOregon Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Joiner v. PoundNebraska Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Doll v. GuthrieCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  4. State Highway Commission v. FevesOregon Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Plough v. PetersenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Marsh v. Boring Furs, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State Highway Commission v. Empire Building Material Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1974
  3. Far West Modular Home Sales, Inc. v. ProapsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  4. Builders Appliance Supply Co. v. A. R. John Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Martin v. McCaigeOregon Supreme Court · 1972

3 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