Parman v. Parman

Oregon Supreme Court

Parman v. Parman

180 P. 906, 94 Or. 307

CourtOregon Supreme Court

DecidedMay 20, 1919

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 180 P. 906 (Parman v. Parman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parman v. Parman, 180 P. 906, 94 Or. 307 (Or. 1919).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

1. In De Foe v. De Foe, 88 Or. 549 (169 Pac. 128, 172 Pac. 980), this court, speaking of the appearance of a district attorney without service of summons, or filing any pleading, said:

“While such appearance of the district attorney confers jurisdiction, it does not in the absence of some motion or other pleading filed by him, confer upon the state any right of appeal, or any right to be heard further in the case,” etc.

We still adhere to this statement of the law, and the motion to dismiss will be overruled.

Overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

1. In De Foe v. De Foe, 88 Or. 549 (169 Pac. 128, 172 Pac. 980), this court, speaking of the appearance of a district attorney without service of summons, or filing any pleading, said:

“While such appearance of the district attorney confers jurisdiction, it does not in the absence of some motion or other pleading filed by him, confer upon the state any right of appeal, or any right to be heard further in the case,” etc.

We still adhere to this statement of the law, and the motion to dismiss will be overruled.

Overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 P. 906, 94 Or. 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parman-v-parman-or-1919.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack