Legal Opinion

King v. Mitchell

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1950PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*440LUSK, C. J.

Section 1-1007, O. C. L. A., provides:

“The court may likewise, in its discretion, and upon such terms as may be just, allow an answer or reply to be made, or other act to be done after the time limited by this code, or by an order enlarge such time; and may also, in its discretion, and upon such terms as may be just, at any time within one year after notice thereof, relieve a party from a judgment, order, or other proceeding taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.”

The motion under consideration was filed pursuant to the second clause of…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Carmichael v. CarmichaelOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Hanthorn v. OliverOregon Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Eastman v. CraryOregon Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Hall v. McConeyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
  5. Mitchell v. CampbellOregon Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Wagar v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State v. BishopCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972
  3. Union Lumber Co. v. Miller​​​​​Oregon Supreme Court · 2017
  4. St. Arnold v. Star Expansion IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Wood v. James W. Fowler Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2000

31 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