Lind v. Boulin
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: George B. Bagley, Judge. Department 1. This proceeding began as an action at law, to replevy a certain motor truck which the complaint alleges had been wrongfully taken by the defendant.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: George B. Bagley, Judge. Department 1. This proceeding began as an action at law, to replevy a certain motor truck which the complaint alleges had been wrongfully taken by the defendant. The defendant, in accordance with the provisions of Section 390, L. O. L., as amended in Chapter 95, Laws of 1917, filed his answer, wherein, after a general denial, an equitable defense is pleaded, which, in brief, is to the effect that in 1914 plaintiff was a contractor in Bellingham, Washington, for whom defendant began working with a Standard truck, hauling construction materials for…
1Opinion of the CourtBenson, J.
Defendant contends that, since plaintiff has not prayed for affirmative relief, the court exceeded its power in granting him a decree of strict foreclosure. This proceeding was begun as a replevin action, and the defendant followed the procedure set out in Chapter 95, Laws of 1917, by *235pleading an equitable defense, and asking for an accounting, and plaintiff replied, without any specific prayer for equitable relief. The amendment of 1917 was designed to relieve a defendant, having an equitable defense, from the necessity of filing a complaint in the nature of a cross-bill, and permits him to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Brown v. TruaxOregon Supreme Court · 1911
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gellert v. Bank of California, National Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Bell v. SpainOregon Supreme Court · 1924
- Coppock v. RobertsOregon Supreme Court · 1925
- Fischer Bros. Milling Co. v. Lawrence Warehouse Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1931
- J. C. Corbin Co. v. PrestonOregon Supreme Court · 1923