Bingham v. Lipman
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Alfred F. Sears, Jr., Judge. Action by Ada Bingham- against Lipman, Wolfe & Company, Isaac N. Lipman, and Adolph. Wolfe. The defendant Lipman, Wolfe & Company is a corporation engaged in conducting a department store in the City of Portland. The defendants Adolph Wolfe and Isaac N. Lipman are, respectively, its vice president ancLsecretary.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Alfred F. Sears, Jr., Judge. Action by Ada Bingham- against Lipman, Wolfe & Company, Isaac N. Lipman, and Adolph. Wolfe. The defendant Lipman, Wolfe & Company is a corporation engaged in conducting a department store in the City of Portland. The defendants Adolph Wolfe and Isaac N. Lipman are, respectively, its vice president ancLsecretary. They are also itsjnanaging agents, and, together with Solomon Lipman and Will Lipman, own all the stock of the corporation. For some time prior to March 30, 1899, the plaintiff was employed by the firm as a clerk in one of its departments.…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Bean
1. It is contended that two causes of action are improperly united in the complaint, — one, for false imprisonment; the other, for conspiracy to extort money. But in an action for trespass the plaintiff may charge and prove all the circumstances accompanying the act, and which were a part of the res gestae, in order to show the temper and purpose with which the trespass was committed, and the extent of the injury, under the rule that a series of unlawful acts, all aimed at a single result, and contributing to the injury complained of, may be averred in the complaint without violating the rule…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Brown v. SwinefordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Denver & Rio Grande Railway v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Conaughty v. . NicholsNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Austin v. BeanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Rice v. CoolidgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Van Lom v. SchneidermanOregon Supreme Court · 1949
- Harris v. Pameco Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Gill v. SellingOregon Supreme Court · 1928
- Pelton v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1932
- Harper v. Interstate Brewery Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1941
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.