Gaither v. Wallingford

Oregon Supreme Court

Gaither v. Wallingford

200 P. 910, 101 Or. 389, 1921 Ore. LEXIS 172

Oregon Supreme Court·Decided September 27, 1921·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

McBRIDE, J.

1. The testimony in the case was somewhat conflicting, but we are of the opinion that there is some evidence tending to sustain each finding. We are therefore precluded from any inquiry into the comparative weight of the testimony.

2. Assuming, therefore, as we must, that the findings are correct, this case does not differ in principle from Petit v. Liston, 97 Or. 464 (191 Pac. 660, 11 A. L. R. 489). That case was carefully considered and we are not disposed in any way to depart from the doctrines therein enunciated. On the authority of that precedent and the cases therein cited, the judgment in the instant case must be affirmed, and it is so ordered. Affirmed.

Bean, Johns and Harris, JJ., concur.

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

McBRIDE, J.

1. The testimony in the case was somewhat conflicting, but we are of the opinion that there is some evidence tending to sustain each finding. We are therefore precluded from any inquiry into the comparative weight of the testimony.

2. Assuming, therefore, as we must, that the findings are correct, this case does not differ in principle from Petit v. Liston, 97 Or. 464 (191 Pac. 660, 11 A. L. R. 489). That case was carefully considered and we are not disposed in any way to depart from the doctrines therein enunciated. On the authority of that precedent and the cases therein cited, the judgment in the instant case must be affirmed, and it is so ordered. Affirmed.

Bean, Johns and Harris, JJ., concur.

Gaither v. Wallingford, 200 P. 910, 101 Or. 389, 1921 Ore. LEXIS 172 (Or. 1921).

Pincite

200 P. 910 (Gaither v. Wallingford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related