Outcault Advertising Co. v. Brooks
Oregon Supreme Court
From Marion: Percy E. Kelly, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mr. Chief Justice Moore. This action was commenced in March, 1915, by the Outcault Advertising Company, a corporation, against John H. Brooks and George Steelhammer, to recover the sum of $109.20. The cause, being at issue, was tried by the court, which made findings of fact in substance as follows: (1) That at all the times mentioned herein the plaintiff was, and now is, a corporation organized and existing…
Read the full summary
From Marion: Percy E. Kelly, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mr. Chief Justice Moore. This action was commenced in March, 1915, by the Outcault Advertising Company, a corporation, against John H. Brooks and George Steelhammer, to recover the sum of $109.20. The cause, being at issue, was tried by the court, which made findings of fact in substance as follows: (1) That at all the times mentioned herein the plaintiff was, and now is, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, and the defendants, John H. Brooks and George Steelhammer, were and are partners…
1Opinion
Argued on rehearing December 12, 1916, former opinion sustained January 2, 1917.
On Rehearing.
(161 Pac. 961.)
In Banc. Former opinion adhered to on rehearing.
For appellant there was a brief over the names of Messrs. McNary, Smith & Shields and Mr. Todd A. Rinehart, -with oral arguments by Mr. Roy F. Shields and Mr. Rinehart.
For respondents there was a brief and an oral argument by Mr. Custer E. Ross.
2Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett
4. This is the second hearing of this case. In an opinion written by Mr. Chief Justice Moore and reported ante, p. 434 (158 Pac. 517), the court reversed a nonsuit, entered on motion of the…
3Cases cited2 opinions
- Ware Bros. v. Cortland Cart & Carriage Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1908
- Outcault Advertising Co. v. BrooksOregon Supreme Court · 1916