Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Kendall v. Mohler

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 17, 1925PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

Plaintiff predicates error on the ruling of the court in permitting witness Woodworth to express opinion relative to the .value of the land in question, for the reason that he had not shown sufficient qualification to do so. We are unable to agree with this contention. The competency of the witness is a preliminary question of fact for the trial court to determine, and its finding in reference thereto will not be reviewed except for abuse of discretion: Laam v. Green, 106 Or. 311 (211 Pac. 791); Multnomah County v. Willamette Towing Co., 49 Or. 204 (89 Pac. 389); Farmers’ Nat. Bank v.…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Adirondack Railway Co. v. New York StateSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  2. Searl v. School Dist. No. 2 in Lake Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. State v. McDanielOregon Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Oregon Growers' Co-operative Ass'n v. LentzOregon Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Multnomah County v. Willamette Towing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1907

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. BurkOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  2. State Highway Commission v. Superbilt Manufacturing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1955
  3. State Highway Commission v. BaileyOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Adair v. McAteeOregon Supreme Court · 1963
  5. State Ex Rel. Casey v. CaseyOregon Supreme Court · 1944

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API