Coblentz v. Jaloff
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.
At the very threshold of the case defendant objected to the introduction of any testimony for the reason that the complaint failed to state a cause of action in that it did not allege specifically wherein defendant was negligent. We think the complaint is good, and the objection therefore untenable. In this class of cases it is, as stated in 3 Ency. PL & Pr. 848, ‘1 sufficient to state generally that the loss or injury was caused by defendant’s negligence, without setting forth the facts constituting the negligence.” In 5 R. C. L. 69, relative to necessary averments in actions against common…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Esberg Cigar Co. v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1899
- Boyd v. Portland Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Cederson v. Oregon Navigation Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Tuohy v. Columbia Steel Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1912
- Boyd v. Portland Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1902
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Ritchie v. THOMASOregon Supreme Court · 1950
- Weinstein v. WheelerOregon Supreme Court · 1930
- Whitmore v. HerrickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Gillilan v. Portland Crematorium Assn.Oregon Supreme Court · 1926
- Dunning v. Northwestern Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1948
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.