Oregon Supreme Court· 4/17/2014

Purdy v. Deere & Co.

Citations

355 Or. 204
324 P.3d 455
2014 WL 1600467
2014 Ore. LEXIS 253

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that courts have adhered to that presumption “for many years”
discussing Shoup v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. , 335 Or. 164 , 61 P.3d 928 (2003
explaining circumstances under which the refusal to give a requested instruction may “substantially affect” the rights of the party requesting the instruction
appellate court must review the evidence at trial only when determining whether an instructional error was harmless
instructional error should be reviewed \in light of the evidence and the parties' theories of the case at trial\
in a civil case, so reviewing a trial court’s rejection of a party’s proposed verdict form

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Balmer, Brewer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Purdy v. Deere & Co.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.