Legal Opinion

Foredice v. Rinehart

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1883PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Union County.

1Opinion of the Court

By tbe Court,

Lord, J.:

This was an action of replevin to recover a certain quantity of flour, which the plaintiff alleges the defendant wrongfully and unlawfully took from his possession, and' still unlawfully withholds from him. The answer denies these facts, and upon issue being joined, the trial resulted in a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, upon which the court rendered judgment for the plaintiff “for the return of 16 2-15 *209barrels of flour in sacks, the property described in the complaint, and in the event that said 16 2-15 barrels of flour cannot be found, that the plaintiff have…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Guille v. Wong FookOregon Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Beard v. BeardOregon Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Lenahan v. LeachOregon Supreme Court · 1967
  4. First National Bank Of Fleming v. Paul K. PetzoldtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1958
  5. Prescott v. HeilnerOregon Supreme Court · 1886

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