Legal Opinion

Murphy v. McCarty

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1949No. 7523PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PORTER, Justice.

The plaintiffs are engaged in the sawmill business in Latah County, Idaho. On June 3, 1948, they entered into a so-called “Loan Agreement” with one Uno C. Fogelstrom. By the terms of such agreement, Fogel-strom agreed to advance to plaintiffs the approximate sum of $29,000 immediately, and to make further advances, for the use of the plaintiffs in their sawmill business and in carrying out the terms of the loan agreement. The loan agreement also contained numerous provisions governing the handling of the products of the mill and purchase of same by Fogelstrom. To secure these…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Olden v. PaxtonIdaho Supreme Court · 1915
  2. People v. Ah Lee DoonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Utah Ass'n of Credit Men v. BudgeIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Mason v. PelkesIdaho Supreme Court · 1936
  5. State v. HolmesWashington Supreme Court · 1895

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Fogelstrom v. MurphyIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Smith v. YoungIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Gasper v. District Court of Seventh Judicial Dist.Idaho Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Clark v. Ada County Board of CommissionersIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Rim View Trout Co. v. Idaho Department of Water ResourcesIdaho Supreme Court · 1991

1 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