Legal Opinion

Powell v. Dayton, Sheridan & Grande Ronde R. R.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1887PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Yamhill County. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtLord, C. J.

This ease is reported in 12 Or. 488. It comes now on demurrer to an amended complaint. The only question involved and to be determined is, whether the covenants in the agreement are dependent or independent. At the former hearing, we held that they were dependent, and we are now urged to reconsider the grounds of that decision. The provision in the contract in respect to the purchase and payment is, that the defendant “ agrees to purchase of said Powell, and pay the said Powell, on or before the expiration of the said term of five years ” * * * and that “ on the said payment of said company,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. President of the Bank of Columbia v. HagnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
  2. Baker v. . HigginsNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  3. Andrews & Bros. v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
  4. Buehler v. GloningerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
  5. Powell v. Dayton, Sheridan & Grande Ronde R. R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1885

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Frink v. ThomasOregon Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Powell v. Dayton, Sheridan & Grand Ronde R. R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1888
  3. ASPINWALL v. RyanOregon Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Abercrombie v. StoddardIdaho Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Hoagland v. MurraySupreme Court of Colorado · 1912

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