Legal Opinion

Storla v. Spokane, P. & S. Transportation Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 22, 1932PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

Three errors are assigned. One of them is based upon the action of the court in permitting defendant, Spokane, Portland & Seattle Transportation Company, to introduce in evidence the testimony of one Bernard given in the case wherein John L. Storla, in his individual capacity, was plaintiff and the defendants herein were defendants: (136 Or. 315, 297 P. 367, 298 P. 1065.)

It is urged that a sufficient showing was not made to the effect that Bernard was either deceased or out of the state; and that the testimony was otherwise inadmissible, because'the instant case is not between the same…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Storla v. Spokane, Portland & Seattle Transportation Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Lidfors v. PflaumOregon Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Clark-Pratt Cotton Mills Co. v. BaileySupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  4. Patton v. LundSupreme Court of Iowa · 1901
  5. Deep Vein Coal Co. v. WardIndiana Court of Appeals · 1919

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cler v. Providence Health System-OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Cler v. Providence Health System-OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API