Legal Opinion

Forbes v. Jennings

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1928PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoBRIDE, J.

This case presents a new and peculiar question. Prior to 1921, Section 514, Or. L., read as follows:

“Power of Court to Modify Decree. At any time after a decree is given, the court or judge thereof, upon the motion of either party, shall have power to set aside, alter, or modify so much of the decree as may provide for the appointment of trustees for the care and custody of the minor children, or the nurture and education thereof, or the maintenance of either party to the suit.”

In 1921, the legislature by Chapter 114, Laws of 1921, amended said section by adding the following proviso:

“ * *…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mansfield v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Goff v. GoffWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Isaacs v. IsaacsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1915
  4. Scott v. ScottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1909
  5. Renick v. LudingtonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1878

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Mason v. MasonOregon Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Cousineau v. CousineauOregon Supreme Court · 1936
  3. State Ex Rel. Casey v. CaseyOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  4. State ex rel. Tolls v. TollsOregon Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Walters v. WaltersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942

12 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