Miller v. HUBBARD-WRAY CO., INC.
This text of 633 P.2d 1 (Miller v. HUBBARD-WRAY CO., INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
James C. MILLER, Appellant,
v.
HUBBARD-WRAY CO., INC., an Oregon Corporation, Respondent.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Douglas P. Cushing and Cushing, Haberlach, Hanson & Black, Medford, for petition.
No appearance contra.
Before RICHARDSON, P.J. and THORNTON and VAN HOOMISSEN, JJ.
THORNTON, Judge.
Defendant Hubbard-Wray Co., in its Petition for Review, 52 Or. App. 897, 630 P.2d 880, points out that our fact statement is in error in stating that the hay baler sold by defendant to plaintiff was later returned to defendant and that defendant had accepted return of the baler and sold it. The opinion is modified accordingly.
Reconsideration granted; former opinion adhered to as modified.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
633 P.2d 1, 53 Or. App. 531, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 3229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-hubbard-wray-co-inc-orctapp-1981.