Legal Opinion

Reed v. Rosenthal

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 26, 1929PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.

This is an action for personal injuries for negligent treatment in a beauty parlor. The cause was tried before the court and a jury and a verdict returned in favor of plaintiff. From a consequent judgment defendants appeal.

Plaintiff is a woman about thirty-five years of age; a college graduate. Prior to December 31st, 1924, the time of the treatment of which she complains, she had patronized the beauty parlor of defendants for two or three years. At that time plaintiff requested a facial known as “Mask of Youth.” The defendants, not having some of the ingredients necessary for such treatment,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Robison v. Oregon-Wash. R. & N. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Johnson v. UnderwoodOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Gentzkow v. Portland Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Carroll v. Grande Ronde Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Doherty v. Hazelwood Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Arnold v. May Department Stores Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1935
  2. Mixon v. BrechtelLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1937
  3. Flatman v. Lulay Bros. Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Compton v. Hammond Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Downey v. Traveler's InnOregon Supreme Court · 1966

5 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