Hughes v. Heppner Lumber Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
1DissentWarner, C. J.
I am compelled to dissent for the reasons that follow, but primarily upon the ground that plaintiffs failed to sustain the burden of proving that the lumber company’s title to the timber was forfeited by a lapse of a reasonable time in which to harvest it.
As a result of a stipulation of the parties and order of the court, the three above entitled suits were consolidated for the purposes of appeal and argument. Justification for this course is found in the identical character of the complaints, answers and replies, except for the legal descriptions of the several parcels of real property…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Ward v. TOWN TAVERNOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Maeder Steel Products Co. v. ZanelloOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Savage v. SavageOregon Supreme Court · 1908
- Harrison v. BirrellOregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Conner v. Citizens' Street RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.