referred error in Oregon

2002We acknowledge that, on first hearing the case in Holland, this court referred to the error at issue as the trial court’s failure to give the instruction that plaintiff had requested. 270 Or at 134 .

2002Fain is inapposite here, where it is undisputed that Abrams requested a jury instruction containing the six "factors" bearing on conversion set out in section 222A of the Restatement. [5] We acknowledge that, on first hearing the case in Holland, this court referred to the error at issue as the trial court's failure to give the instruction that plaintiff had requested. 270 Or at 134 , 522 P.2d 208 .

2002Hill, 31 Or App at 45 .

1997In resolving that issue, the Court referred to its analysis in Denver, &c., Railway v. Harris, 122 US 597, 610 , 7 S Ct 1286 , 30 L Ed 1146 (1887): “In Denver & Rio Grande Railway v. Harris, the railroad company, as the record showed, by an armed force of several hundred men, acting as its agents and employes, and organized and commanded by its vice-president and assistant general manager, attacked with deadly weapons the agents and employes of another company in possession of a railroad, and forcibly drove them out, and in so doing fired upon and injured one of them, who thereupon brought an

1997In resolving that issue, the Court referred to its analysis in Denver, &c., Railway v. Harris, 122 US 597, 610 , 7 S Ct 1286 , 30 L Ed 1146 (1887): “In Denver & Rio Grande Railway v. Harris, the railroad company, as the record showed, by an armed force of several hundred men, acting as its agents and employes, and organized and commanded by its vice-president and assistant general manager, attacked with deadly weapons the agents and employes of another company in possession of a railroad, and forcibly drove them out, and in so doing fired upon and injured one of them, who thereupon brought an

1960Because of the misdescription of the presumption, plaintiff excepts to that instruction.” In Dorn v. Clarke-Woodward Drug Co., 65 Or 516, 520 , 133 P 351 , this court, in construing the disputable presumption “a person is innocent of crime or wrong” (§ 799, LOL, now OES 41.360), held the word “wrong” as used therein includes the commission of a tort.

1960Because of the misdescription of the presumption, plaintiff excepts to that instruction.” In Dorn v. Clarke-Woodward Drug Co., 65 Or 516, 520 , 133 P 351 , this court, in construing the disputable presumption “a person is innocent of crime or wrong” (§ 799, LOL, now OES 41.360), held the word “wrong” as used therein includes the commission of a tort.

1945Again in Brigham v. Claflin, the Court referred to the rule that one state will not take cognizance of penalties imposed by the laws of another state and said: “In these cases * * * the courts say that the liability imposed upon the officers of the corporation for a failure to perform the duty enjoined by *440 a statute is in the nature of a penalty; that the law imposing the liability can have no extraterritorial operation. * * #” Brigham v. Claflin, 31 Wis. 607 , 11 Am.

1935Co., 28 Or. 44 ( 40 P. 1089 ), this court referred to the rule that inadequacy of price, sufficient to set aside the public sale of property, must be so gross as to shock the *446 conscience where there are no confidential relations existing between the parties and no proof of fraud.

1935Co., 28 Or. 44 ( 40 P. 1089 ), this court referred to the rule that inadequacy of price, sufficient to set aside the public sale of property, must be so gross as to shock the *446 conscience where there are no confidential relations existing between the parties and no proof of fraud.