Legal Opinion

Fowle v. House

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1897PublishedCited by 7 opinions

From Polk: Geo. H. Burnett, Judge. Motion to recall mandate and amend the decree.

1Per curiam

The motion to recall the mandate is denied. The decree of the court below sustaining a demurrer to the complaint because it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of suit was affirmed in this court (29 Or. 114, 44 Pac. 692); but no final disposition of the cause was made, it being remanded to the court below “for such further proceedings as may be deemed proper, not inconsistent with the opinion herein.” Under the mandate sent down, the court was at liberty to determine in the first instance whether the plaintiff should be allowed to amend his complaint, and with the exercise…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Powell v. D. S. & G. R. R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Fowle v. HouseOregon Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. RichardsonOregon Supreme Court · 1906
  2. State v. Warner Valley Stock Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Lieuallen v. MosgroveOregon Supreme Court · 1900
  4. McLeod v. LloydOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Oregon v. Warner Stock Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1906

2 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