Legal Opinion

Meyer v. Harvey Aluminum

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1972PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenecke, J.

Plaintiffs obtained a judgment in the sum of approximately one-half million dollars for injuries to their fruit crops and trees caused by emissions from defendants’ aluminum plant. Defendants appeal.

I

Qualifications of Opinion Witness

Plaintiffs recovered damages for the excessive number of apricot culls, apparently, only for the year 19G5. The only evidence that an excessive number of culls was caused by fluorides emitted from defendants’ plant is the opinion testimony of plaintiff Wilson Meyer. Defendants objected to his testimony upon the ground that he was not qualified as an expert to give…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State Highway Commission v. ArnoldOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Bean v. Diamond Alkali CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1969
  3. CROSS ET UX v. HarrisOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Kinzua Lumber Co. v. DaggettOregon Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Douglas Construction Corp. v. Mazama Timber Products, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1970

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. State v. RogersOregon Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Myers v. Cessna Aircraft CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Weiss v. NORTHWEST ACCEPTANCE CORPORATIONOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Bixler v. First Nat. Bank of OregonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  5. Broughton Lumber Co. v. BNSF Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2012

26 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