Legal Opinion

Dermody v. Fanning

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 26, 1936PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

The decisive question here is whether the trial court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial on motion of defendant.

The ground of such motion is alleged misconduct of the attorney for plaintiff.

Comments of the judge are criticized, failure to rule as promptly as defendant thinks he should is called to our attention, and it is argued that the trial court should have rebuked the attorney for plaintiff; but no exceptions were saved to these things. For that reason, we think that they are not feviewable now.

The defendant insists that plaintiff’s attorney was guilty of such misconduct as to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. BlodgettOregon Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Rayburn v. DayOregon Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Lyman v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1890
  4. Rosumny v. MarksOregon Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Webb v. IsenseeOregon Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Blue v. City of UnionOregon Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Breimon v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1973
  3. Bracht v. Palace Laundry Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Warner v. MAUSOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Breimon v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1973

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API