Legal Opinion

Seivert Et Ux. v. Powell

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 16, 1951PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLatourette, J.

This is a forcible entry and detainer action brought by plaintiffs to recover possession of certain premises theretofore leased to defendants, it being alleged that *639plaintiffs are entitled to the immediate and exclusive possession of such property located in the county of Multnomah, of which defendants are in possession and holding the same with force.

Defendants in their answer generally denied the allegations of the complaint and pleaded an equitable defense in substance that they had a ten-year lease on the premises at a rental of $60.00 per month for the first three years of the lease,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McIntire's Administrator v. BondCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  2. Schmid v. ThorsenOregon Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Gribbie v. TomsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1904

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. City of Chicago v. Sievert Electric Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  2. Seivert Et Ux. v. PowellOregon Supreme Court · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API