Rogue River Fruit & Produce Ass'n v. Gillen-Chambers Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Jackson: Frank M. Calkins, Judge. In Banc. Statement by Mr. Justice Eakin. This is an action by the Rogue River Fruit & Produce Association against the G-illen-Chambers Company upon a contract for the erection of a building.
Read the full summary
From Jackson: Frank M. Calkins, Judge. In Banc. Statement by Mr. Justice Eakin. This is an action by the Rogue River Fruit & Produce Association against the G-illen-Chambers Company upon a contract for the erection of a building. The plaintiff alleged that by reason of the failure of the defendant to keep the terms of the contract it had been damaged in the sum of $2,000. On a trial it recovered judgment for $1,509.52. Defendant appealed, and gave a stay bond, as is provided by Section 551, subdivision 4, L. O. L. Within the time prescribed the plaintiff filed a counter-bond, as required by…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Eakin
1. The power of this court to issue an injunction in such a case, when the action is within the purview of Section 553, L. O. L., is upheld by this court in Kollock & Co. v. Leyde, 77 Or. 569 (143 Pac. 621); so *115the only question to be considered is as to whether this is an action upon a contract. This it clearly is.
Counsel for defendant contends that the section refers only to a contract for the direct payment of money — for example, a promissory note, when the promisee admits liability for a specific amount — and that it was not intended to cover an action for damages, although the right to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kollock & Co. v. LeydeOregon Supreme Court · 1915
3Cited by5 opinions
- Spokane County v. Pacific Bridge Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Lovell v. PottsOregon Supreme Court · 1924
- Seaside, City of v. RandlesOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- Sandblast v. WilliamsOregon Supreme Court · 1969
- State Highway Construction Contracts, Pennsylvania Department of Justice1932