Legal Opinion

Georges v. Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided February 3, 1960No. Civ. 9999PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EAST, District Judge. 1

At this time the Court has the obligation to rule upon the defendant's motion made yesterday upon the close of the plaintiffs’ testimony. While the motion reads in the language of a motion for directed verdict, the Court will treat it the same as a motion for dismissal pursuant to Rule 41, subd. (b), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A. 2

It is basic that in consideration of this motion the Court must assume all of the evidence submitted in plaintiffs’ case to be true and view it in its entirety in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs’ contentions…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Voyt v. Bekins Moving & Storage Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Harold L. Ward v. Union Bond & Trust Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
  3. Normile v. Oregon Navigation Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  2. Warner v. Southwestern Bell Telephone CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1968
  3. McClure Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Reuben H. Donnelley Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Gas House, Inc. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  5. Robinson Insurance & Real Estate Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1973

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