Sanborn-Cutting Co. v. Butler
Oregon Supreme Court
From Tillamook: George E. Bagley, Judge. In Banc. On the eleventh day of April, 1917, plaintiff began an action to recover a balance alleged to be due upon an account, together with interest thereon from an average date.
Read the full summary
From Tillamook: George E. Bagley, Judge. In Banc. On the eleventh day of April, 1917, plaintiff began an action to recover a balance alleged to be due upon an account, together with interest thereon from an average date. On the twenty-sixth day of the same month, defendants served upon plaintiff, and subsequently filed, an offer of compromise in the following form: “The defendants in the above-entitled cause hereby offer to allow judgment to be given against them in said cause for the sum of $126.” This offer was not accepted. On the same day an answer was filed, admitting the original…
1Opinion of the CourtBenson, J.
The bill of exceptions discloses that upon the trial the court, pursuant to an agreement of the parties, instructed the jury that whatever amount should be found due to plaintiff should bear interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from September 20, 1915. The only dispute between the parties was upon the question as to whether or not the defendants were entitled to an additional credit of $500, which they claimed to have paid by check. The verdict being in excess of the offer in the sum of seventy cents, the judgment is obviously more favorable, unless, in the comparison, we consider the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bathgate v. . HaskinNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Hammond v. N. P. R. R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1892
- Pike v. . JohnsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Kellogg v. PierceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cochrane v. ForbesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Sanborn-Cutting Co. v. ButlerOregon Supreme Court · 1919