William Earl Gsell, and v. C. A. Dumbeck, and John N. Adams, III and Donald A. Rowberry, And

431 F.2d 1204, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7148
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 30, 1970·No. 25555·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In a non-jury trial, an able and experienced trial judge found the defendants guilty of fraudulent misrepresentations and entered judgment against all defendants. Although defendant Adams was the ringleader, there is little doubt that appellant Dumbeek actively participated in the overall plan. Only Dumbeek appeals.

We affirm the judgment for the reasons stated in the opinion and findings of the trial judge. Gsell v. Adams, Dumbeck & Rowberry, 316 F.Supp. 394 (D.Or.1969). The proof supports the elements of actionable fraud as they are stated in Conzelmann v. Northwest Poultry & D. Prod. Co., 190 Or. 332, 350, 225 P.2d 757 (1950); Musgrave v. Lucas, 193 Or. 401, 410, 238 P.2d 780 (1951); and Libby Creek Logging, Inc. v. Johnson, 225 Or. 336, 358 P.2d 491 (1960). Moreover, we hold that the actions of the trial court in permitting the amendment of the pretrial order to conform to the proof and in finding against the appellant on the issue of waiver are not clearly erroneous. The judgment must be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

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

William Earl Gsell, and v. C. A. Dumbeck, and John N. Adams, III and Donald A. Rowberry, And, 431 F.2d 1204, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7148 (9th Cir. 1970).

431 F.2d 1204 (William Earl Gsell, and v. C. A. Dumbeck, and John N. Adams, III and Donald A. Rowberry, And) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related