Legal Opinion

Shaw v. Moon

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 1926PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

The sole question, arising on general demurrer, is whether the complaint herein states a cause of action against the defendants, or either of them. Plaintiff alleges that he is the owner and entitled to the possession of a certain “Drive Clamp,” an apparatus used in well drilling, and which is of the reasonable value of $20; that the defendant Moon, maliciously and without probable cause, procured the defendant Fortner, as recorder and ex-officio justice of the peace .of the City of 'Wasco, to issue a search-warrant as follows:

“In the Recorder’s Court of the City of Wasco, County of Sherman,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Broom v. DouglassSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  3. Watts v. GerkingOregon Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Calhoun v. LittleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  5. Rush v. BuckleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Wolf v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Lundgren v. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
  3. Hoppe v. KlapperichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
  4. Kuhnhausen v. StadelmanOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Utley v. City of IndependenceOregon Supreme Court · 1965

34 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