Legal Opinion · Dissent

Vaughn v. Langmack

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1964Published

1DissentRossman, J.

I join in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Sloan, and assume the privilege of amplifying the reasons set forth by him. With nothing but respect for the majority, I believe that its ruling is unjust and unfortunate.

I am convinced that the majority places an erroneous meaning upon the word “accrued” where it appears in ORS 12.010 (of our statute of limitation). That matter will receive further attention shortly.

Now that the majority opinion has become the law, the discovery rule which the courts of other states are embracing in increasing numbers is beyond judicial reach in Oregon. For…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Ayers v. MorganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  3. Fernandi v. StrullySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1961
  4. Johnson v. CaldwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Thatcher v. De TarSupreme Court of Missouri · 1943

12 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