Jensen v. Foss
33 P. 535, 24 Or. 158, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 96
Opinion
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
Jensen v. Foss, 33 P. 535, 24 Or. 158, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 96 (Or. 1893).
33 P. 535 (Jensen v. Foss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Erb v. Shope
12 P.2d 308 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1932)
Keeler Bros. v. School Dist. No. 108
178 P. 218 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1919)
McAlister v. Long
54 P. 194 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1898)