Marshall v. Marshall
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Currie v. Scott (Tex. 1945)
- Simpson v. Occidental Building & Loan Ass'n (Wyo. 1933)
- Dept. of Human Services v. V. G. (Or. Ct. App. 2026)
- Rowe v. ROWE (Or. 1959)
- In re Estate of Nawrocki (Or. 1954)
- Ladd & Bush Trust Co. v. Kurtz (Or. 1942)
- In re Cloninger's Estate (Wash. 1941)
- Howell v. Deady (District Court, D. Oregon 1941)
- Estate of Matthiessen (Cal. Ct. App. 1937)
- Hansen v. Oregon Humane Society (Or. 1933)
- Hodgkin v. Miller (Or. 1923)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court granting a divorce and the custody of a minor child to Fred Marshall, the defendant and cross-complainant. It now comes up on motion for an order striking out the brief of appellant and affirming the decree for the reason that the appellant has failed to comply with the rules of this court.
There is an entire absence of any attempt to comply with Rule 10 of this court (100 Or. 747), which requires, either in the abstract or brief, a specification of the errors to be relied upon. The brief also fails to point out, by reference to page or pages of the record, the testimony relied upon by the appellant for reversal of the decree. In fact, the rules of the court have not been complied with in any of these
Motion to Affirm; Decree Allowed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.