Legal Opinion

BRINK ET UX v. Multnomah County

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 9, 1960PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.

The defendant county initiated a condemnation proceeding to acquire a portion of plaintiffs’ land for the purpose of relocating and widening a county road. The Board of County Commissioners fixed the damages for the taking at $5,725. Plaintiffs appealed to the Circuit Court for Multnomah County and obtained a verdict and judgment for $8,000, together with interest. Plaintiffs appeal from that judgment, assigning as error the exclusion of certain evidence which they sought to elicit from Elmer Kolberg, a witness called on their behalf.

When Kolberg was called as a witness, defendant’s counsel…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. United States v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
  3. City & County of San Francisco v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Robertson v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1943
  5. Schmitt v. EmerySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  2. House v. Combined Insurance Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1996
  3. Nielsen v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  4. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  5. State Ex Rel. Willey v. WhitmanArizona Supreme Court · 1962

19 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