Legal Opinion

Klussman v. Day

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1923PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOURT, J.

Defendants J. M. Day and Wilhelmina Day are husband and wife. Plaintiff brought this suit against the defendants to foreclose a mortgage upon a small farm, the title to which is in de*111fendant J. M. Day, and to obtain a sale thereof to satisfy a promissory note purporting to be secured by the mortg’age mentioned. The mortgage and note in suit bear the signatures of defendants, and each instrument on the face thereof appears to have been regularly executed by the defendants. The real property described in the mortgage is the home of defendants.

As a'defense to the suit defendants pleaded and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Fairbanks v. SnowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  2. Royal v. GossSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
  3. Butson v. MiszOregon Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Wells v. NeffOregon Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Guinn v. Sumpter Valley Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Davis v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Cook v. the MV WasaborgDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1960
  3. Hansen v. BussmanOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Union Bond & Trust Co. v. GilbertOregon Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Guaranty & Loan Co. v. RuffOregon Supreme Court · 1927

2 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