Legal Opinion
Houston v. Pomeroy
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided June 14, 1961PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtSloan, J.
In this case the trial court entered a decree that reformed a written undertaking entered into by the parties herein and compelled defendant to perform the agreement as reformed. Defendant appeals. We have decided that the trial court was without jurisdiction to hear the case. A resume of the facts will reveal the reason for our decision.
The factual background was peculiar. Prior to the actual events which prompted this litigation de*501fendant had been employed in some capacity aboard a merchant vessel owned by a company referred to as Drytrans, Inc. During the course of that employment…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Thompson v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Taubel-Scott-Kitzmiller Co. v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Wetmore v. KarrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Harris v. Avery Brundage Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Frazier v. WassermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968