Legal Opinion

Salmon v. Miller

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided August 1, 1974PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, C.J.

This action was commenced by decedent’s wife as personal representative, to recover those items of damage allowed under ORS 30.075. ① Decedent was injured while riding as a guest in defendant’s automobile. The amended complaint alleged gross negligence on the part of the defendant. A subsequent motion for leave to file amended pleadings, ■ through which plaintiff intended to add a count alleging simple negligence, was denied by the court at the close of the evidence. The trial judge directed a verdict in favor of defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff presents two arguments on appeal. First,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Williamson v. McKennaOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Duerst v. LimbockerOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Bradfield v. KammerrerOregon Supreme Court · 1960

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Duerst v. LimbockerOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Hill v. GarnerOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Kruse v. FitzpatrickOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Hill v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API