Legal Opinion

Kane v. Kane

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 1929PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, C. J.

The deed executed by plaintiffs to convey the real property involved to defendant Frank P. Kane was sufficient to convey all of the right, title and interest of the grantors in said deed in and to the real property described therein: Or. L., § 9846. No question is raised about the sufficiency in the form or matter of the deed. Plaintiffs rely on an alleged express trust arrangement and the contention that said deed did not express the intention of the parties.

As a true statement of the position of plaintiffs with reference to the deed executed by them to their father, defendant Frank P. Kane,…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Sutherlin v. BloomerOregon Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Bicocchi v. Casey-Swasey Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Marks v. Twohy Bros.Oregon Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Ambrose v. HuntingtonOregon Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Cain v. CoxWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hughes v. HelzerOregon Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Weatherford v. WEATHERFORDOregon Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Willamette Production Credit Ass'n v. DayOregon Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Weatherford v. WEATHERFORDOregon Supreme Court · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API