Crandall v. Piette
This text of 1 Or. 226 (Crandall v. Piette) 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
Defendant allowed judgment to go against him by default before the justice, and could not, for that reason, afterwards appear* and defend as a matter of right; his application, therefore, for leave to answer, was addressed to the discretion of the District Court. That court, in the exercise of such discretion, might allow, or refuse altogether the application, or might grant it, upon such terms as in its judgment were just under the circumstances. We cannot, [227]*227as a general practice, overrule the exercise of discretion by the District Court, and if we could, there is no very apparent error in refusing to remove a legal bar to plaintiff’s defence, simply to enable him to interpose a legal bar to the plaintiff’s right of recovery.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Or. 226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crandall-v-piette-or-1856.