Legal Opinion

Frank v. Matthiesen

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 3, 1925PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcBBIDE, C. J.

This has been a very interesting matter and its decision has not been devoid of difficulty. Most of it arises from the unique statutes in force in Oregon and a few of the other states, which require a judgment to be first entered on the verdict and thereafter permit a motion for a. new trial. The logical order of these proceedings, prior to this innovation, has usually been first, the trial, second, the verdict, and third, the motion for a new trial, and, on the disposition of that if denied, a judgment upon the verdict. But, for some reason, not clearly apparent, the legislatures in a few of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brooks v. San Francisco & North Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Pierce v. BirkholmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Nielson v. PattersonArizona Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Thompson v. Tlat, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  3. Thompson v. Tlat, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API