Bunch v. Thomblison
This text of 135 P. 879 (Bunch v. Thomblison) 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.
Opinion
Opinion by
For the purposes of this case many of the contentions in the able brief of counsel for respondent may be admitted. But conceding without deciding that the court had power to correct the decree to conform to the original complaint and mortgage, and that it could do so under the circumstances without notice to the defendant Leonard, there remained other matters which it could not correct nunc pro tunc. The fact remains that the land in dispute was never advertised for sale, and therefore was never in fact sold. Subdivision 2, Section 237, L. O. L., requires that the notice of sale shall “particularly describe” the property to be sold. It is admitted that the notice of sale in this case contained no description of the property in dispute, but described another and different subdivision. It was not in the power of the court by a nunc pro tunc order, or otherwise, to dispense with a proper notice of sale of the property.
[257]*257For this reason the judgment of the Circuit Coart is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
135 P. 879, 67 Or. 254, 1913 Ore. LEXIS 179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bunch-v-thomblison-or-1913.