Johnson v. Fanno

32 P. 396, 23 Or. 514, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 53
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 27, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 32 P. 396 (Johnson v. Fanno) 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
Johnson v. Fanno, 32 P. 396, 23 Or. 514, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 53 (Or. 1893).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff, and against the defendant, in an action to recover possession of real property. [515]*515The assignments of error in the notice of appeal are as follows: “1. Error of the court, committed at the trial of this cause, in admitting testimony offered by the plaintiff, and objected to by the defendant. 2. Error of the court, committed at the trial of this cause, in excluding testimony offered on behalf of the defendant, and objected to by the plaintiff. 3. Error of the court, committed at the trial of this cause, in giving instructions to the jury and which were excepted to by defendant, and the exception allowed. 4. Other errors apparent upon the face of the record.” Under the rule announced by this court in the recent cases of Herbert v. Dufur, 23 Or. 462 (32 Pac. Rep. 302), and Archbishop v. Hack, 23 Or. 536 (32 Pac. Rep. 402), each of these assignments of error is manifestly insufficient and does not present any question for review in this court, and the judgment of the court below must be affirmed.

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

Related

McDonald v. North River Insurance
213 P. 349 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 P. 396, 23 Or. 514, 1893 Ore. LEXIS 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-fanno-or-1893.