Legal Opinion

Walling v. Lebb

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 6, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

Among the reasons urged by plaintiff in this cause to justify the annulment of the judgment at law is the alleged failure of the complaint in that case to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The writer does not concur in this contention. The pleader in drafting his complaint in that case painted the defendant therein as a deep-dyed defrauder who had wronged the plaintiff, and then alleged facts that constituted fraud on the part of that defendant. True, the complaint in that case was not concise in its statement of facts; nevertheless, the matter contained therein was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Christerson v. FrenchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Hollinger v. ReemeIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Stauffer v. WattsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  4. Dixon v. SimpsonOregon Supreme Court · 1929
  5. United States National Bank v. HumphreyIdaho Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Rajneesh Foundation International v. McGreerOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Ketcham v. SellesOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Portland General Electric Co. v. Ebasco Services, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2013
  4. Rajneesh Foundation International v. McGreerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  5. Winters v. Falls Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API