Jensen v. Foss

Oregon Supreme Court

Jensen v. Foss

33 P. 535, 24 Or. 158, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 96

CourtOregon Supreme Court

DecidedJune 26, 1893

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 33 P. 535 (Jensen v. Foss) 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

Jensen v. Foss, 33 P. 535, 24 Or. 158, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 96 (Or. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The objection made is that the notice of appeal does not state the error upon which the defendants and appellants rely for a reversal of the judgment. The first error assigned is to the entire instruction of the court to the jury, and is too vague' and general to notify the plaintiff of the particular issues to be tried on the appeal. This objection falls directly within the rule laid down in Murray v. Murray, 6 Or. 17, and Swift v. Mulkey, 17 Or. 532.

The judgment must be aepiemed.

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

Per Curiam.

The objection made is that the notice of appeal does not state the error upon which the defendants and appellants rely for a reversal of the judgment. The first error assigned is to the entire instruction of the court to the jury, and is too vague' and general to notify the plaintiff of the particular issues to be tried on the appeal. This objection falls directly within the rule laid down in Murray v. Murray, 6 Or. 17, and Swift v. Mulkey, 17 Or. 532.

The judgment must be aepiemed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 P. 535, 24 Or. 158, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 96, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jensen-v-foss-or-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack