Priester Et Ux v. Thrall Et Ux
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.
This cause which was instituted pursuant to the provisions of our laws which authorize the maintenance of forcible entry and wrongful detainer actions (ORS 105.105 through 105.160) is before us upon a motion made by the plaintiffs to dismiss the defendants’ appeal. The motion is predicated upon the fact that the defendants have not filed the undertaking which ORS 105.160 describes in the following language:
“If judgment is rendered against the defendant for the restitution of the real property described in the complaint, or any part thereof, no appeal shall be taken by the defendant from the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Namba v. McCourt and NeunerOregon Supreme Court · 1948
- Danvers v. DurkinOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Heiney v. HeineyOregon Supreme Court · 1903
- Zelig v. Blue Point Oyster Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1909
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lindsey v. NormetSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Ketring v. SturgesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1963
- State Ex Rel. Nilsen v. WhitedOregon Supreme Court · 1964
- Goldie's Bookstore, Inc. v. Superior Court of CaliforniaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1984
- Lindsey v. NormetSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.