Legal Opinion

Nendel v. Meyers

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1939PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an automobile collision.

A verdict was rendered in favor of plaintiff and against the defendant George Meyers in the sum of $3,395.57, but not against the defendant H. R. Layton. A judgment in conformity with such verdict was duly entered on August 9, 1938. On August 18, 1938, the plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, based on certain alleged errors of law. The motion for new trial ■was heard and determined on October 8, 1938, but the order was not entered until October 11,1938. The term of court ended on October 2,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Lancel v. PostlethwaiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. State ex rel. Sinko v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Kraft v. LamptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  4. Lingelbach v. CarriveauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Voinich v. PoeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. DeMendoza v. HuffmanOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Sadler v. Oregon State BarOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  3. State Ex Rel. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. OlsenOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  4. State Ex Rel. Emerald People's Utility District v. JosephOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Ryerse v. HaddockOregon Supreme Court · 2004

11 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