Marshall v. Gustin
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 1. Statement hy Mr. Justice Benson. This is a suit in equity. The substance of the complaint is that the plaintiffs were two of the eight children of C. A. Marshall, who died intestate, November 20, 1905, leaving to his heirs among other property seventy-five acres of land in Clarke County, Washington; that the defendant, who is a sister of decedent, was the duly appointed guardian of the persons and estates of the minor…
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 1. Statement hy Mr. Justice Benson. This is a suit in equity. The substance of the complaint is that the plaintiffs were two of the eight children of C. A. Marshall, who died intestate, November 20, 1905, leaving to his heirs among other property seventy-five acres of land in Clarke County, Washington; that the defendant, who is a sister of decedent, was the duly appointed guardian of the persons and estates of the minor heirs, including plaintiffs, and taking advantage of their youth and inexperience wrongfully and falsely represented to…
1Opinion of the Court
BENSON, J. —
Defendant urges that the demurrer should have been sustained upon two grounds: (1) That it appears upon the face of the complaint that the statute of limitations has run against the claims of both plaintiffs; and (2) that the facts alleged do not disclose a case calling for the interposition of a court of equity.
1. As to the first of these, it is sufficient to say that no demurrer was interposed upon that ground, and it cannot now be considered: Portland v. Coffey, 67 Or. 507 (135 Pac. 358).
2. As to the second contention it may be remarked that from the complaint it appears, at…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Portland v. CoffeyOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Zinn v. ZinnWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1903
3Cited by1 opinion
- Beck v. Barnett National Bank of JacksonvilleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960