Blomquist v. Jennings

There is no merit in the contention that the complaint fails to state a cause of action. Defendants did not see fit to stand on their demurrer and therefore the complaint should be liberally construed. It is entitled .to every reasonable intendment: Rottig v. Polsky, 101 Or. 530 (201 Pac. 188). It is also urged that the complaint is fatally defective in that it does not allege “that the $260 belonged to plaintiffs or that they were purchasers of the automobile,” that defendants owned the automobile or that they sold it. This, in our opinion, is a strained and highly technical construction of…