Legal Opinion

Fluhrer v. Bramel

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 1938PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, C. J.

Respondent moves the court for an order dismissing the appeal, in the above entitled cause, taken by defendant Bramel, insofar as said defendant appeals from the decree in favor of plaintiff, for the reason that said defendant has, since the entry of said decree, acquiesced therein and has acted in affirmance thereof.

The decree appealed from rescinded the contract between plaintiff and defendant Bramel, for the sale of a certain service station situated at 8140 S. W. Macadam Ave., Portland, Oregon, thereby adjudicating that the defendant Bramel was the owner of the property, which was the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Galvin v. Brown & McCabeOregon Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Portland Construction Co. v. O'NeilOregon Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Moore v. FloydOregon Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Elwert v. MarleyOregon Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Kellogg v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Pacific General Contractors, Inc. v. Slate Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Kelly v. TracyOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Miller Et Ux v. Barker Et UxOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Lewis Et Ux. v. Shook Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Fluhrer v. BramelOregon Supreme Court · 1938

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