Commercial National Bank v. Temple

Oregon Supreme Court

Commercial National Bank v. Temple

109 P. 129, 56 Or. 543, 1910 Ore. LEXIS 199

Oregon Supreme Court·Decided June 14, 1910·Published·Cited by 17 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from Umatilla County. The transcript was filed November 18, 1909. On April 21, 1910, plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and to affirm the judgment, for the reason that defendants have failed to file a brief within the 30 days after the filing of the transcript, as required by Rule 37 of this court, 50 Or. 589 (91 Pac. xii). There is no appearance upon this motion by defendant, and as no brief was filed by him, as required, the motion is allowed, the appeal dismissed, and the judgment affirmed. State v. Horn, 39 Or. 152 (65 Pac. 1066); Schafer v. Beecher, 54 Or. 273 (101 Pac. 899.) Affirmed.

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

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from Umatilla County. The transcript was filed November 18, 1909. On April 21, 1910, plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and to affirm the judgment, for the reason that defendants have failed to file a brief within the 30 days after the filing of the transcript, as required by Rule 37 of this court, 50 Or. 589 (91 Pac. xii). There is no appearance upon this motion by defendant, and as no brief was filed by him, as required, the motion is allowed, the appeal dismissed, and the judgment affirmed. State v. Horn, 39 Or. 152 (65 Pac. 1066); Schafer v. Beecher, 54 Or. 273 (101 Pac. 899.) Affirmed.

Commercial National Bank v. Temple, 109 P. 129, 56 Or. 543, 1910 Ore. LEXIS 199 (Or. 1910).

Pincite

109 P. 129 (Commercial National Bank v. Temple) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related