Legal Opinion

Engelgau v. Walter

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1947PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WINSLOW, J. (Pro Tempore)

This is an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution. The complaint is in the usual form. The answer, after admitting that the criminal prosecution had terminated favorably to the respondent, denies the charging part of the complaint. A jury trial resulted in a verdict for respondent against appellant in the sum of $3150. Judgment was entered upon this verdict, from which judgment this appeal is prosecuted.

Appellant sets forth three assignments of error. The first is based upon the ruling of the court denying appellant’s motion for directed verdict. The…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Vinal v. CoreWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Thompson v. Beacon Valley Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1888
  3. Israel v. BrooksIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
  4. Heldt v. WebsterTexas Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Thienes v. FrancisOregon Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Gustafson v. Payless Drug Stores Northwest, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Rose v. WhitbeckOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Shoemaker v. SELNESOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Humbert v. KNUTSONOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Drake v. AndersonOregon Supreme Court · 1959

3 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