Boyer v. Burton

149 P. 83, 79 Or. 662, 1916 Ore. LEXIS 140
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 28, 1916
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 149 P. 83 (Boyer v. Burton) 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
Boyer v. Burton, 149 P. 83, 79 Or. 662, 1916 Ore. LEXIS 140 (Or. 1916).

Opinions

Mr. Justice Eakin

delivered the opinion of the court.

In this case the defendant appealed, and the plaintiffs filed a cross-appeal. The defendant now moves to dismiss the cross-appeal, for the reason that the judgment cannot be appealed from by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs consented to the rendition of the judgment given, and thereby waived all right to appeal from it. They filed an alternative motion for a judgment for the sum of $1,264.80, or if the court should find that they were not entitled to that judgment, then that it grant judgment in their favor for the sum of $421.60, and for their costs and disbursements. The court acting upon the said motion granted them the alternative prayer and rendered judgment in their favor for $421,-60, and for their costs and disbursements.

It has been held by this court frequently that no appeal lies from a judgment or decree entered by consent: Twitchell v. Risley, 56 Or. 226 (107 Pac. 459); Rader v. Barr, 22 Or. 495 (29 Pac. 889). Here the motion is in the alternative, that if the court should deny the first part of the motion, it should enter judgment for plaintiffs and against the defendant for $421.60, and for plaintiffs’ costs and disbursements. The court found that plaintiffs were not entitled to judgment for the $1,264.80.

The motion to dismiss is sustained as to plaintiffs’ appeal. Motion Sustained.

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

Related

Garlock v. Wake County Board of Education
712 S.E.2d 158 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2011)
Garlock v. WAKE COUNTY BD. OF EDUC.
712 S.E.2d 158 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2011)
Bell Rose Sanitarium, Inc. v. Metz
425 P.2d 168 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1967)
Dillon v. . Wentz
41 S.E.2d 202 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1947)
Rorvik v. Astoria Box & Paper Co.
299 P. 333 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1931)
Basche-Sage Hdw. Co. v. De Wolfe
231 P. 135 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1925)
Johnson v. Paulson
154 P. 685 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
149 P. 83, 79 Or. 662, 1916 Ore. LEXIS 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyer-v-burton-or-1916.