Legal Opinion

Bagley v. Kerr

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 14, 1941PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a decree of the circuit court which dismissed his suit. The purpose of the suit was to (a) reinstate a mortgage which is described in the complaint and which was executed and delivered by the defendants to the plaintiff to secure payment of their promissory note in the denomination of $3,600;. (b) secure judgment upon the note; (c) foreclose the mortgage; and (d) secure incidental relief.

The note above mentioned was signed October 1, 1928, and was payable “to the order of O. J. Bagley or Mary Bagley, husband and wife, and unto the survivor thereof.”…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Millett v. TempleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  2. Gannon v. BronstonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  3. Jones v. WettlinWyoming Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Parker v. . MottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  5. McGlynn v. GranstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. First National Bank of Fairbanks v. TaylorAlaska Supreme Court · 1971
  2. National City Bank of Indiana v. OrtizCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2013
  3. in Re Albert Ortiz, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2013
  4. in Re Albert Ortiz, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API