Rekdahl v. Cheney
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.
Appellant complains of the submission of this cause to the jury because of the assumed inadequacy of the evidence upon the question of damages. To adopt the reasoning of appellant upon this phase of the case would have the effect of holding that there can be no substantial recovery where children are the victims, because, at the time, they had no earning capacity. The statement of such a rule carries its own refutation.
Where a showing has been made, such as outlined in the statement of facts in this case, there is a basis for judgment; and the learned court below committed no error in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Houghkirk v. President, Managers & Co. of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Krieger v. Aurora, Elgin & Chicago RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1909
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. McKinneySupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Cody v. Market St. Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
- Carnego v. Crescent Coal Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1914
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Goheen v. General Motors CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1972
- Van Cleave v. LynchUtah Supreme Court · 1946
- Ross v. RobinsonOregon Supreme Court · 1942
- Scott v. BroganOregon Supreme Court · 1937
- Kreidler v. MillsDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1943
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.