Harlow v. Oregonian Pub. Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Calvin U. Gantenbein, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice King. This is an action for damages for an alleged violation of a contract originally entered into between Pittock, as owner of the Daily Morning Oregonian, and Myron M. Southworth, which contract was by mesne assignments transferred to F. E. and L. A. Harlow, plaintiffs herein, and is as follows: “A memorandum of an agreement made this 11th day of April, A. D. 1864, between Henry L. Pittock, of the City…
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Calvin U. Gantenbein, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice King. This is an action for damages for an alleged violation of a contract originally entered into between Pittock, as owner of the Daily Morning Oregonian, and Myron M. Southworth, which contract was by mesne assignments transferred to F. E. and L. A. Harlow, plaintiffs herein, and is as follows: “A memorandum of an agreement made this 11th day of April, A. D. 1864, between Henry L. Pittock, of the City of Portland, Oregon, and Myron M. Southworth, of the same place: That the said Henry L. Pittock has for the sum of $350…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice King
1. The first point presented for consideration is whether plaintiffs have, in law, succeeded to all the rights and interests of Southworth under the agreement quoted, and are thereby placed in all respects in the position formerly occupied by him. It appears to be well settled that where, as in this case, the contract is for personal services, requiring a high degree of trust and confidence, without a definite limitation as to time, and free from any declaration therein to the effect that its terms shall be binding upon the heirs and assigns of the contracting parties, such agreement is not…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Freedman's Saving & Trust Co. v. ShepherdSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- McLeod v. DespainOregon Supreme Court · 1907
- Fitzgerald v. First Nat. Bank of Rapid CityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Bailey v. . RutjesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Boehm v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Staroske v. Pulitzer Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Cross v. CampbellOregon Supreme Court · 1944
- Jaloff v. United Auto Indemnity ExchangeOregon Supreme Court · 1926
- Doherty v. Harris Pine Mills, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1957
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.