Legal Opinion
Wolfer v. Hurst
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided August 28, 1905Published
From Marion: George H. Burnett, Judge. Action by Geo. J. Wolfer against W. S. Hurst and H. A. Hinkle to recover possession of real property. A motion to dismiss the appeal was'overruled pursuant to an opinion by Mr. Justice Moore, and the judgment appealed from was afterward affirmed, the opinion being written by Mr. Chief Justice Wolverton. The facts appear in the opinions.
1Opinion
Decided 28 August, 1805.
On the Merits.
2Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Wolverton
On the 1st of October, 1903, the plaintiff leased to defendants certain premises for the period of one year. The lease contained, among others, the following conditions, namely:
*162“And it is agreed that if any rent shall be due and unpaid, or if default shall be made in any of the covenants herein contained, then it shall be lawful for the said party of the first part to reenter said premises and to remove all persons therefrom; the party of the second part hereby waiving any notice to quit or of intention to reenter under the statute. And the said party of…
3Cases cited19 opinions
- Williams v. PotterNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Espen v. HinchliffeIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
- Harrington v. WatsonOregon Supreme Court · 1883
- Smith v. ReederOregon Supreme Court · 1892
- McDevitt v. LambertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.