Legal Opinion

Watt v. Associated Oil Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 20, 1927PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, J.

The defendants moved for a non-suit and later for a directed verdict, and the court’s refusal to grant either of these motions is the only alleged error to be considered here.

One who parks his automobile upon the public traveled part of a highway is prima facie a violator of the law, and it is incumbent upon him to show affirmatively that it was necessary for him to so park it at that time and place. It is not the duty of a party injured in a collision, under such circumstances, to show that such parking was not necessary, but for the other party to bring himself within the exception…

2Cited by14 opinions

  1. Northern Indiana Transit, Inc. v. BurkIndiana Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Martin v. Oregon Stages, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Briggs v. John Yeon Co., Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Scoville v. KeglorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Dister v. LudwigSupreme Court of Missouri · 1951

9 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