Talbot & Casey, Inc. v. Simon

298 P. 644, 136 Or. 74, 1931 Ore. LEXIS 112
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 13, 1931
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 298 P. 644 (Talbot & Casey, Inc. v. Simon) 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
Talbot & Casey, Inc. v. Simon, 298 P. 644, 136 Or. 74, 1931 Ore. LEXIS 112 (Or. 1931).

Opinion

KOSSMAlN, J.

The issue which awaits our disposition occurs upon the respondent’s motion to dismiss the appeal taken by the appellant from an order of the circuit court which set aside a default judgment and permitted the respondent to file an answer. In seeking to sustain the appeal the plaintiff argues that the order aforementioned is of the type embraced by § 7-501, Oregon Code 1930, which defines the appealable orders, judgments and decrees: Bowman v. Holman, 48 Or. 351 (86 P. 792), and Hall v. McCan, 62 Or. 556 (126 P. 5), hold that an order setting aside a default *75 judgment is not a “final order affecting a substantial right” as defined by the above section of our code. Since the decision in Bowman v. Holman, supra, the 1907 Session Laws, chapter 162, § 6, amended the quoted language by adding thereto: “An order setting aside a judgment and granting a new trial.” In Taylor v. Taylor, 61 Or. 257 (121 P. 431, 121 P. 964), this court construed the language last quoted and held that an order which sets aside a default and permits an answer to be filed is not one which sets aside a judgment and grants a new trial. See to the same effect Carmichael v. Carmichael, 101 Or. 172 (199 P. 385). After again considering the language of § 7-501, Oregon Code 1930, we remain satisfied with the construction placed upon it by the above decisions. It follows that the motion is allowed.

Dismissed.

Bean, C. J., Band and Kelly, JJ., concur.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Olsen
590 P.2d 231 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1979)
Froman v. Jones
16 P.2d 21 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1932)
Abrahamson v. Northwestern Pulp & Paper Co.
17 P.2d 1117 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
298 P. 644, 136 Or. 74, 1931 Ore. LEXIS 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/talbot-casey-inc-v-simon-or-1931.