Legal Opinion

Hill v. Harritt

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1932PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

The parties are in accord upon the principles of substantive law governing this cause. The only serious problem which awaits solution concerns the inferences to be drawn from the evidence, a brief statement of which we shall now undertake to make.

Subsequent to their marriage, and prior to 1926, the two defendants, K. W. and Alves Harritt, had lived upon a 33-acre farm in Polk county. The ownership of this farm, and of another in the same county, came to Harritt by inheritance from his parents. Subsequent to the death of the parents, Harritt’s brothers and sisters executed a deed conveying…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. SteevesOregon Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Bradtfeldt v. CookeOregon Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Chance v. GrahamOregon Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Garnier v. WheelerOregon Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Sitton v. PeyreeOregon Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Moll v. TurnbowOregon Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Ballard v. Walker Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API