Legal Opinion

Merimac Co. v. Portland Timber & Land Holding Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 10, 1971PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHowell, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a decree (erroneously denominated a “judgment order”) entered in favor of defendant in a suit filed by plaintiff to require the defendant to convey certain property to plaintiff.

Tbe trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law that Beuben Lenske, an attorney *575(who contended that he was the sole stockholder and representative of plaintiff) did not have authority to represent plaintiff, that plaintiff failed to carry the burden of proof, and that Lenske had “come into this Court of Equity with unclean hands.”

The facts, for reasons which we will discuss…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Arbogast v. Pilot Rock Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Merit v. LoseyOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Hallin v. BodeWashington Supreme Court · 1961
  4. McKee v. FieldsOregon Supreme Court · 1949

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Fleming v. Baptist General ConventionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
  2. North Pacific Lumber Co. v. OliverOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Delaney v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Gratreak v. North Pacific Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  5. Welsh v. CaseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API