Legal Opinion

De Mars v. Heathman

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1930PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBbown, J.

Defendant’s motion for a judgment of

involuntary nonsuit is somewhat involved with his argument in support thereof. So far as material to the issues, it reads:

“Your honor, at this time we would like to interpose a motion for a nonsuit, on the ground and for the reason that the evidence as adduced here fails to show any actionable negligence on the part of the defendant. There is no testimony that tends to show any negligence except that there was some grease on the floor.”

The plaintiff testified, in substance, that she had been in the employ of the operator of the hotel for about two months…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brugher v. . BuchtenkirchNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  2. Jennings v. TompkinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
  3. Gleason v. BoehmSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1896
  4. Brown v. BerlesMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Capen v. HallSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1899

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Lyons v. LichOregon Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Saunders v. A. M. Williams & Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Briggs v. John Yeon Co., Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Cowden v. EARLEYOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Waller v. Northern Pacific Terminal Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1946

8 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