Cram v. Powell
Oregon Supreme Court
From Crook: T. E. J. Duffy, Judge. Department 1. This is an action at law for money had and received. The parties are H. S. Cram, plaintiff and respondent, and H. F. Powell, defendant and appellant. The cause was tried in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon in and for Crook County, and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,236.46. The plaintiff alleges two causes of action.
Read the full summary
From Crook: T. E. J. Duffy, Judge. Department 1. This is an action at law for money had and received. The parties are H. S. Cram, plaintiff and respondent, and H. F. Powell, defendant and appellant. The cause was tried in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon in and for Crook County, and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,236.46. The plaintiff alleges two causes of action. In the first, he sets forth that there was due and owing defendant from plaintiff on the twenty-first day of October, 1913, the sum of $14,377.40; that this indebtedness was evidenced by three…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
At the threshold the writer will repeat a common observation of the courts when discussing cases of this character: Each case founded upon the ground of duress must rest upon its own peculiar facts and circumstances. ¡
1. It is a well-established principle that a payment made under compulsion, coercion or duress may be recovered. It is equally well settled that a payment made by the debtor on his own motion, without compulsion, is voluntary, and an action will not lie for its recovery.
The evidence set down in the statement, together with the following, is substantially the testimony of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Kilpatrick v. . Germania Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Joannin v. OgilvieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Mayor of Baltimore v. LeffermanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1846
- United States v. New York & Cuba Mail Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Patty v. Salem Flouring Mills Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1909
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Adams v. Crater Well Drilling, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Cunningham v. PottsDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1925
- Klussman v. DayOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Dorfman v. Portland Electric Power Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
- Lojy Air Company, Inc. v. Global Financial & Leasing, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2022