Case law

Irving v. Smith

132 F. 207 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Aug 4, 1904

Parker v. Overman, 18 How. 141 , 15 L. Ed. 318 . A person may reside in one state and be a citizen in another. Evans v. Davenport, 4 McRean, 574, Fed. Cas. No. 4,558. In Brown v. Keene, 8 Pet. 112 , 8 L.

Savings & Loan Soc. v. Multnomah County

60 F. 31 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Feb 19, 1894

In cases of attachment and for purposes of taxation it is constantly disregarded, as the following cases will show: Catlin v. Hull, 21 Vt. 153 ; People v. Commissioners of Taxes, 23 N. Y. 225 ; People v. Home Ins. … Bank v. Kimball, 103 U. S. 735 .

Adams v. Lytle

154 F. 876 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Jun 17, 1907

The first point has been determined against the contention of counsel by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Reid v. Colorado, 187 U. S. 137 , 23 Sup. Ct. 92, 47 L. Ed. 108 . … Reid v. Colorado, supra: Rasmussen v. Idaho, 181 U. S. 198 , 21 Sup. Ct. 594, 45 L. Ed. 820 .

United States v. Oriental American Co.

129 F. 249 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Mar 5, 1904

Apgar v. United States, 78 Fed. 332 , 24 C. C. A. 113 . … Such is-the holding of the Board of General Appraisers. As already appears, cocoa-butter is a product of the bean of the-cacao or chocolate tree.

John v. Smith

91 F. 827 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Feb 4, 1899

The case of Pennoyer v. … Ould v. Hospital, 95 U. S. 303 .

Doe v. Northwestern Coal & Transportation Co.

78 F. 62 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Dec 21, 1896

Goodman v. Simonds, 20 How. 343 ; Swift, v. Smith, 102 U. S. 442 ; Murray v. Lardner, 2 Wall. 110 ; Hotchkiss v. Banks, 21 Wall. 354 ; Electric Co. v. Dick, 3 C. C. A. 149 , 52 Fed. 379 ; Bank v. Holm, 19 C. C. … The complainant’s interests were at that time represented in the board of directors.

Miller v. Wattler

165 F. 359 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Jun 22, 1908

Ed. 1134 ; Dillard’s Adm’r v. Central Virginia Iron Co. (C. C.) 125 Fed. 157, 159 ; Brown v. Fletcher (C. C.) 140 Fed. 639 . … Citing Judge Story in Slack v. Walcott, 3 Mason, 508 , Fed. Cas. No. 12,932. And in Brown v. Fletcher (C. C.) 140 Fed. 639 , a case similar in many respects to the one at bar, Judge Swan says: . “In Dunn v.

The Fideliter

8 F. Cas. 1176 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · May 6, 1870

See, also, as bearing upon this point, Kempis v. Kennedy, 5 Cranch [9 U. S.] 185; Turner v. President, etc., 4 Dall. [4 U. S.] 8; McCormick v. Sullivan, 10 Wheat [23 U. S.] 199; Hodgson v. Bowerbank, 5 Cranch [9 U. … S.] 303; Capron v. Von Noorden, 2 Cranch [6 U. S.] 126; Sullivan v. Fulton Steamboat Co., 6 Wheat. [19 U. S.] 450; [Koing v. Bayard] 1 Pet [20 U. S.] 258; [Brown v. Keene] 8 Pet. [33 U. S.] 112; [Jackson v.

American & General Mortg. & Inv. Corp. v. Marquam

62 F. 960 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Aug 13, 1894

Hubbard v. Gurney, 64 N. Y. 459 ; Irvine v. Adams, 48 Wis. 468 , 4 N. W. 573 ; Stillwell v. Aaron, *962 69 Mo. 539 ; Bank v. Kent, 4 N. H. 221; Perry v. Hodnett, 38 Ga. 104 ; Brown v. Rathburn, 10 Or. 158 .

United States ex rel. Northwestern Warehouse Co. v. Oregon R. & Navigation Co.

159 F. 975 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Feb 24, 1908

Justice Brown in Interstate Commerce Commission v. B. & O. R. Co., 145_U. S. 263, 12 Sup. Ct. 844, 36 L. … Harp v. Choctaw, O. & G. R. Co., 125 Fed. 145 , 61 C. C. A. 405 ; Robinson et al. v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 129 Fed. 753 , 64 C. C. A. 281 ; Rhodes v. Northern Pacific R. Co., 34 Minn. 87 , 24 N. W. 347 .

Coleman v. Flavel

40 F. 854 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Dec 26, 1886

Canal Co. v. Clark, 13 Wall. 322 ; Browne, Trade-Marks, §§ 39, 144. But the plaintiffs do not and need not claim that the words “Wm. T, Coleman & Co., Sole Agents, San Francisco, Cal., TJ. S. … As was said by the chancellor in Coats v. Holbrook, 2 Sandf.

Powell v. Oregonian Ry. Co.

36 F. 726 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Dec 3, 1888

Brown, 36 N. … In Bohn v.

Pendergrast v. Lampman

19 F. Cas. 139 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Dec 7, 1863

The libellant substantially alleges that on or about October 12, 1863, he shipped at San Francisco on board the steamer Sierra Nevada as a coal-passer, for a voyage to Portland and back; and that about three o’clock in the … PENDLETON (BENNETT v.). See Case No. 1,322. The alleged Injuries on the libellant’s back are not proven, and it is highly improbable that they were inflicted at all.

Corbitt & Macleay Co. v. United States

153 F. 648 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Mar 18, 1907

Justice Curtis has said, in Warren v. Peaslee, Fed. Cas. … Shaw v. United States, 122 Fed. 443 , 58 C. C. A. 425 .

La Moine Lumber & Trading Co. v. Kesterson

171 F. 980 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Jul 26, 1909

See Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168 , 19 L. Ed. 357 ; Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Pennsylvania, 122 U. S. 326 , 7 Sup. Ct. 1118, 30 L. Ed. 1200 ; Coit & Co. v. Sutton. 102 Mich. 324 , 60 N. W. 690 , 25 L. R. … A. 819; McNaughton Co. v. McGirl, 20 Mont. 124 , 19 Pac. 651 , 38 L. R. A. 367, 63 Am. St. Rep. 610 ; Ware v. Hamilton Brown Shoe Co., 92 Ala. 145 , 9 South. 136 .

Doe v. Northwest Coal & Transportation Co.

64 F. 928 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Dec 17, 1894

arrell and Coulter, claiming* to act as a majority of the company’s board of directors, authorized the making of a note and mortgage to secure the same by the company to Farrell for $7,992.(50; that said note and mortgage … Manufacturing Co. v. Hutchinson, 63 Fed. 498 .

Moody v. Patterson

153 F. 830 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Mar 18, 1907

Such arc the cases of Hartranft v. Langfeld, 125 U. S. 128 , 8 Sup. Ct. 732, 31 L. Ed. 672 , and Meyer v. Cadwalader, 89 Fed. 963 , 32 C. C. A. 456 . … Much of what Judge Adams has s^id in Wyman v.

Ex parte Martin

180 F. 209 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Jun 20, 1910

In Urquhart v. Brown, 205 U. S. 179, 181 , 27 Sup. Ct. 459, 51 L. Ed. 760 , a very recent case, the court yet adheres to the doctrine of the Royall Case. Mr. … Justice Harlan in Minnesota v.

Gregory v. Southern Pac. Co.

157 F. 113 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Nov 11, 1907

Justice Brown applies to the statute. … In Poff v. Telephone Co., 72 N.

Maxwell v. Akin

89 F. 178 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Aug 25, 1898

The cases of Thomas v. Railroad Co., 101 U. S. 82 , and Oregon Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Oregonian Ry. Co., 130 U. S. 22 , 9 Sup. … The power possessed by the board of directors to levy and collect assessments is vested in the receiver, who may act when the board fails or refuses, as in this case, to do so. The demurrer is overruled.