Legal Opinion

Runnells v. Leffel

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1922PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

This is the second judicial proceeding between Runnells, plaintiff, and Leffel, defendant, arising out of the retention by Leffel of the commission received for the sale of real estate. For the decision in prior case, see Bunnells v. Leffel, 93 Or. 342 (176 Pac. 802, 183 Pac. 756). In the former case, it was decided by the lower court, and affirmed by this court, that no sum of money was due to Runnells from Leffel on account of their real estate transactions. The deliberate decision of this court, although pronounced by a divided court, must be considered as stare decisis upon the questions…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. United States v. California & Oregon Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
  3. Caseday v. LindstromOregon Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Glenn v. SavageOregon Supreme Court · 1887
  5. White v. LaddOregon Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State of Oregon v. DeweyOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Haney v. Neace-Stark Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Jaloff v. United Auto Indemnity ExchangeOregon Supreme Court · 1926
  4. First Nat. Bank of Burns v. BucklandOregon Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Shaveland v. ShavelandOregon Supreme Court · 1924

4 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