1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Or.
  4. 239 Or.
  5. 239 Or. 1 (1964)
 

LILIENTHAL v. KAUFMAN

239 Or. 1 (1964)

395 P.2d 543

LILIENTHAL v. KAUFMAN

Supreme Court of Oregon.

Reargued June 30, 1964.

Affirmed September 30, 1964.

Petition for rehearing denied November 4, 1964.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Cleveland C. Cory, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was George H. Fraser, Portland.

Louis Schnitzer, Portland, argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.

Before ROSSMAN, Presiding Justice, and PERRY, SLOAN, O'CONNELL, GOODWIN, DENECKE and LUSK, Justices.

AFFIRMED.

DENECKE, J.

This is an action to collect two promissory notes. The defense is that the defendant maker has previously been declared a spendthrift by an Oregon court and placed under a guardianship and that the guardian has declared the obligations void. The plaintiff's counter is that the notes were executed and delivered in California, that the law of California does not recognize the disability of a spendthrift...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases