Legal Opinion

Mannix v. Harju

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 2, 1928PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Circuit Court for Clatsop County, vacating and setting aside a decree foreclosing an attorney’s lien. The vacated decree and the order were both made and entered at the same term of the court. The evidence offered upon the trial of the cause is not before us and there is nothing to show upon what grounds the court acted in the entry of the decree or in the making of the order. By some inadvertence or otherwise, the order appealed from, after directing that the decree should he vacated, then provided for the granting of a new trial as in a law action.

There…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lachele v. Oregon Realty Exchange Investment Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Seidel v. ChickOregon Supreme Court · 1913

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Re Shepherd's EstateOregon Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Lane County Escrow Service, Inc. v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Freytag v. VitasOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Waldow v. WaldowOregon Supreme Court · 1950
  5. In Re Mannix EstateOregon Supreme Court · 1933

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