Hoy v. Gorst

Oregon Supreme Court

Hoy v. Gorst

151 P. 276, 79 Or. 617, 1916 Ore. LEXIS 144

DecidedMarch 7, 1916

StatusPublished

This text of 151 P. 276 (Hoy v. Gorst) 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

Hoy v. Gorst, 151 P. 276, 79 Or. 617, 1916 Ore. LEXIS 144 (Or. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

, This is an action in replevin to recover a Ford machine, called in the complaint an automobile. The evidence shows that plaintiff paid $35 for it, and that it was probably worth $90. There was a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

There are some unsubstantial errors, but from the whole testimony we are satisfied that the verdict and judgment- are such as should have been rendered, and under the provisions of Article VII, Section 3, of the Constitution, are affirmed.

Affirmed. Rehearing Denied.

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

Opinion

Per Curiam.

, This is an action in replevin to recover a Ford machine, called in the complaint an automobile. The evidence shows that plaintiff paid $35 for it, and that it was probably worth $90. There was a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

There are some unsubstantial errors, but from the whole testimony we are satisfied that the verdict and judgment- are such as should have been rendered, and under the provisions of Article VII, Section 3, of the Constitution, are affirmed.

Affirmed. Rehearing Denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 P. 276, 79 Or. 617, 1916 Ore. LEXIS 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoy-v-gorst-or-1916.