Williams v. Knighton

1 Or. 234
Oregon Supreme Court·Decided December 15, 1856·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Olney, J.

Waiving all other questions, it does not appear that the note was due. This cannot be implied from the allegations that he has a cause of action against the defendant. That is a conclusion of law. The pleader should state the facts which he thinks gives a right of action, and not keep back those facts, and offer the court his opinion. If one fact, necessary to a right of action, be omitted, all others might as well, and the complaint might be reduced to this, “ that the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant for five hundred dollars, for which he asks judgment.”

The complaint is insufficient, and the judgment must le reversed.

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

Williams v. Knighton, 1 Or. 234 (Or. 1856).

1 Or. 234 (Williams v. Knighton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dame v. Cochiti Reduction & Improvement Co.
79 P. 296 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1905)
Wright & Son v. Bankers' & Merchants' Town Mutual Fire Insurance
73 Mo. App. 365 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1898)