Hirsch v. May
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: George N. Davis, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by Sanford Hirsch against Emanuel May.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: George N. Davis, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by Sanford Hirsch against Emanuel May. The amended complaint states: “That heretofore the above-named plaintiff and de-. fendant had mutual claims and accounts against each other, concerning which a dispute arose, and thereafter on or about the 1st day of April, 1913, in order to settle said dispute a balance was struck, at which time it was agreed that in settlement of all controversies and disputes between the plaintiff and defendant said balance was agreed upon, to be the sum of $530,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Buenett
1. It is provided in Section 79, L. O. L.:
“* * At any time when the pleadings in the suit or action are complete, or either party fails or declines to plead further, the court may, upon motion, grant to any party moving therefor, such judgment or decree as it may appear to the court the moving party is entitled to upon the pleadings.”
The defendant had answered admitting all the material allegations of the amended complaint and had made certain averments which he deemed sufficient to support equitable relief. The plaintiff completed the pleadings by tendering an issue of law upon the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Smith v. FarraOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Zeuske v. ZeuskeOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Coles v. MeskimenOregon Supreme Court · 1906
- Donart v. StewartOregon Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by7 opinions
- Western Bank v. MorrillOregon Supreme Court · 1966
- Owen v. LeberOregon Supreme Court · 1924
- Tooze v. HeightonOregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Buras v. Department of RevenueOregon Tax Court · 2004
- Clark v. AdneyOregon Supreme Court · 1930
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.