Legal Opinion

Bowles v. Creason

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1938PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

The facts developed upon the trial are very similar to those described in Bowles v. Creason et al., 156 Or. 278 (66 P. (2d) 1183), this being a retrial of that cause. In writing that decision, the late Mr. Justice Campbell, after disposing of assignments of error which required a reversal of the judgment entered in favor of the defendants, stated, “As the case will have to be retried, we will avoid future mistakes by calling attention to * * *” and then reviewed the merits of many additional contentions of the parties in an endeavor to render clear the course to be pursued upon the retrial.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Washington Gas Light Co. v. LansdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  2. Doremus v. RootWashington Supreme Court · 1901
  3. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. ThompsonTexas Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Emmons v. Southern Pac. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Dare v. BossOregon Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Wiebe v. SeelyOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Marange v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966
  3. Brown v. Meier & Frank Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Jensen v. NolteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1943
  5. Feazle v. Industrial Hospital Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1940

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