Berg v. Goldstone

Oregon Supreme Court

Berg v. Goldstone

259 P. 916, 123 Or. 19

Oregon Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1927·Published

Opinion

*20 PER. CURIAM.

This case came on for hearing and respondent filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment for the reason that no abstract has been filed as required by Section 554, Or. L., and Rule 6 of this court.

No abstract has ever been filed, nor has any showing been made tending to excuse such neglect. This appeal will therefore be dismissed, and the judgment of the lower court affirmed: Swanson v. Leavens, 26 Or. 561 (40 Pac. 230), Close v. Close, 28 Or. 108 (42 Pac. 128), and Van Tassel v. Jefferson County, 90 Or. 600 (177 Pac. 955). Rehearing Denied.

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

*20 PER. CURIAM.

This case came on for hearing and respondent filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment for the reason that no abstract has been filed as required by Section 554, Or. L., and Rule 6 of this court.

No abstract has ever been filed, nor has any showing been made tending to excuse such neglect. This appeal will therefore be dismissed, and the judgment of the lower court affirmed: Swanson v. Leavens, 26 Or. 561 (40 Pac. 230), Close v. Close, 28 Or. 108 (42 Pac. 128), and Van Tassel v. Jefferson County, 90 Or. 600 (177 Pac. 955). Rehearing Denied.

Berg v. Goldstone, 259 P. 916, 123 Or. 19 (Or. 1927).

Pincite

259 P. 916 (Berg v. Goldstone) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related