Legal Opinion

Williams v. Barbee

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 12, 1940PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLusk, J.

The defendants assert that the court below erred in denying their motion to require plaintiffs to make the complaint more definite and certain by alleging the character of their title, whether legal nr equitable.

The suit is authorized by § 6-1001, Oregon Code 1930, as amended by Ch. 107, Oregon Laws 1931, and Ch. 275, Oregon Laws 1937. So far as here material, the statute provides:

“Any person claiming an interest or estate in real property not in the actual possession of another may maintain a suit in equity against another who claims an interest or estate therein adverse to him, for the…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Grider v. TurnbowOregon Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Wheeling & Elm Grove R. R. v. Town of TriadelphiaWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Maffet v. Oregon & Cal. RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Suburban Homes Co. v. NorthMontana Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Savage v. SavageOregon Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. County of Lincoln v. FISCHEROregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Rayburn Et Ux. v. Crawford Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Fry v. DH Overmyer Co., Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Braunstein v. TrottierCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  5. Schroeder Et Ux. v. ToedtmeierOregon Supreme Court · 1948

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