Allen v. Angus

133 P. 1190, 69 Or. 494
Oregon Supreme Court·Decided July 22, 1913·Published

Opinions

Mr. Justice Moore

delivered the opinion of the court.

1. This is a motion to dismiss an appeal. A decree in this suit was rendered by the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Hood River County. Desiring to secure a review of such determination, the defendants ’ counsel caused to be served a notice of appeal, and filed the same March 31, 1913. Eight days thereafter there was served and filed an undertaking on appeal, and no exceptions were taken to the sufficiency of the sureties thereon. The transcript on appeal was filed in this court at Salem, May 15, 1913, and it is insisted that the authenticated copy of the record of the cause should have been forwarded to Pendleton on or before May 5, 1913, at which time the next term of this court convened, after the appeal was perfected.

The question here presented was considered and determined adversely to the contention of plaintiffs’ counsel in the case of Pringle Falls Electric Power & Water Co. v. Patterson, 65 Or. 474 (128 Pac. 820), and the conclusion thus reached is controlling herein.

It follows that the motion should be denied, and it is so ordered. Motion to Dismiss Appeal Denied.

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

Allen v. Angus, 133 P. 1190, 69 Or. 494 (Or. 1913).

133 P. 1190 (Allen v. Angus) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bank of Montreal v. . Recknagel
17 N.E. 217 (New York Court of Appeals, 1888)
Redman v. Ætna Insurance
4 N.W. 591 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1880)
Clarno v. Grayson
46 P. 426 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1896)
Pringle Falls Power Co. v. Patterson
128 P. 820 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
Cook v. Dabney
139 P. 721 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1914)