Bloech v. Hyland Homes Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.
The main question presented in the ease is based upon the contention of defendants that the written contract “is void under the statute of frauds” for the reason the description of the realty is insufficient. The description of the lot in the contract is ‘‘ That for, and in consideration of a warranty deed to Lot 8 (eight) Block 41 (forty-one) Taylors Astoria according to the recorded plat thereof.”
Astoria is an important city in Clatsop County, Oregon, with a national history. It is well known that ‘ ‘ Taylors Astoria ” is a part of Astoria. If any one lacks such knowledge it can be obtained…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- House v. JacksonOregon Supreme Court · 1893
- Allen v. KitchenIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Guyer v. WarrenIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
- Bogard v. BarhanOregon Supreme Court · 1908
- Joyce v. TomasiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- High v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Bloech v. Hyland Homes Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1928
- Carl W. Wills v. Warren H. Young, as Ancillary Administrator C.T.A. Of Estate of Charles K. Ives, DeceasedCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1958
- Hertel v. WoodardOregon Supreme Court · 1948
- Meadowlark Investment Corp. v. CroeniOregon Supreme Court · 1964
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.