Henry v. Postal Telegraph Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Robert Tucker, Judge. In Banc. This is an action to recover damages for alleged personal injuries suffered by plaintiff by reason of the fault of an employee of defendant in negligently and recklessly running against her with a bicycle.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Robert Tucker, Judge. In Banc. This is an action to recover damages for alleged personal injuries suffered by plaintiff by reason of the fault of an employee of defendant in negligently and recklessly running against her with a bicycle. The allegations material here are as follows: “That on or about the eighteenth day of July, 1916, in the City of Portland, Oregon, between the hours of 9 and 10 o’clock in the forenoon, the plaintiff was crossing Washington Street, from the north side_ to the south side thereof, at or near the intersection of said Washington Street with Sixth…
1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, J.
1, 2. It is settled in this state and by the great weight of authority in other jurisdictions that the permanency of an injury may be shown under a general allegation of damages without more explicit pleading: Sigel v. Portland, R. L. & P. Co., 67 Or. 285 (135 Pac. 866); 13 Cyc. 189, and cases there cited. Counsel for defendant virtually concede this to be the law, but contend that plaintiff is estopped by her pleading to take advantage of this *185general rule. The particular sentence in plaintiff’s complaint to which reference is made in the ingenious argument of counsel is this: After…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rugenstein v. OttenheimerOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- Sigel v. Portland Ry. L. & P. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Home Insurance v. Peoria & P. U. Ry. Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1898
3Cited by3 opinions
- Saunders v. A. M. Williams & Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1936
- Madden v. Columbia & Nehalem River RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Erven v. EagyOregon Supreme Court · 1935