Legal Opinion

Stewart v. Houk

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1928PublishedCited by 58 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

The sole problem presented to us is whether Chapter 342 of the 1927 Session Laws is in conflict with the Oregon Constitution.

The act provides:

“Any person who as a guest accepts a ride in any vehicle, moving upon any of the public highways of the state of Oregon, and while so riding as such guest receives or sustains an injury, such person shall have no right of recovery against the owner or driver of such motor vehicle, and in the event that such person while so riding as such guest is killed or dies as a result of injury sustained while so riding as such guest, then neither the estate nor…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Reining v. . City of Buffalo, Etc.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
  2. Mattson v. AstoriaOregon Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Gearin v. Marion CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Flanders v. Town of MerrimackWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Batdorff v. Oregon CityOregon Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. Shea v. OlsonWashington Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Sidle v. MajorsIndiana Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Hale v. Port of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Williams v. WilsonKentucky Supreme Court · 1998

53 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