Legal Opinion
Herzog v. Mittleman
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided February 16, 1937PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
This is an action to recover damages for injuries sustained in an automobile accident while plaintiff was riding as a gratuitous guest.
On June 23, 1933, plaintiff and defendants Harry Gevurtz and Harry Mittleman, and one Miller, all residing in Portland, undertook a trip to California in an automobile to attend a meeting of a brotherhood of which they were all members. Defendant Mittleman was the owner of the automobile and the other three were riding as Ms gratuitous gnests. They left Portland about 6:30 a. m. and proceeded down the Oregon Coast highway, defendant Mittleman driving his car.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Perozzi v. GaniereOregon Supreme Court · 1934
- Heiman v. KloiznerWashington Supreme Court · 1926
- Grant v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Richards v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1935
- Schumann v. Bank of California, N. A.Oregon Supreme Court · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Harding v. Ohio Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Falls v. MortensenOregon Supreme Court · 1956
- TURNER, ADM'R v. McCreadyOregon Supreme Court · 1950
- A. M. Collins & Co. v. Panama R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
- Linn v. NoredCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1939
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.