Legal Opinion
Fredenburg v. Horn
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided October 2, 1923PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, C. J.
As to the contention that the bill of sale was improperly admitted because it did not contain a reference to any consideration, we are of the opinion that the objection is not well taken. Section 808, paragraph 5, Or. L., reads as follows:
*681“Section 808. Agreement not in Writing, When Void. — In the following cases this agreement is void unless the same or some note or memorandum thereof, expressing the consideration, be in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged, or by his lawfully authorized agent; evidence, therefore, of the agreement shall not be received other than the writing,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sage v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
- Miller v. HirschbergOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Austin v. VanderbiltOregon Supreme Court · 1906
- Penny v. CroulMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Smith v. IdeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1830
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hall v. WorkOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Hayes Oyster Co. v. DulcichCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Luna Dale Roscoe v. Joseph A. RoscoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Beck v. GivensWyoming Supreme Court · 1957
- Davison v. DavisonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1928
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.