French v. State Industrial Accident Commission
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBossman, J.
Two issues only are argued in the plaintiff’s (appellant’s) brief: (a) The trial judge erred in failing to instruct the jury that a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife are presumed to have been legally married; and (b) the •plaintiff’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto should have been sustained. The plaintiff claims that she and one George French contracted a common-law marriage in Idaho. The defendants do not deny that common-law marriages may be lawfully contracted in that state, but both parties agree that such marriages cannot be legally contracted in either…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Mockowik v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Judson v. Bee Hive Auto Service Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1930
- Tanner v. Lindell Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- Riska v. Union Depot RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- State ex rel. Mulholland v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Wiebe v. SeelyOregon Supreme Court · 1959
- Kantola v. Lovell Auto Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1937
- Boykin v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Summerville v. GillespieOregon Supreme Court · 1947
- National Fuel Co. v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.