Horsfall v. Logan
Oregon Supreme Court
From Coos: John S. Coke, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by "William Horsfall against William Logan.
Read the full summary
From Coos: John S. Coke, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by "William Horsfall against William Logan. Tbe allegations of tbe complaint material for consideration are these: “That on or about August 17, 1905, at the defendant’s request, tbe plaintiff performed and rendered professional services consisting of a surgical operation upon tbe defendant’s wife, for wbicb services so rendered tbe defendant became indebted to plaintiff in tbe sum of $210, wbicb sum tbe defendant agreed to pay; that no part thereof has been paid except $50 August 2,1906, and tbe…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett
As we quote from his brief:
“The appellant contends that a partial- payment alone does not revive an oral, implied contract for the payment of money so as to prevent the running of the statute.”
The fallacy of this contention is the assumption that it is an implied contract upon which the action is maintained. Attention to the complaint reveals that it is an express contract here involved, for the averment is that the defendant agreed to pay the amount mentioned. According to the initial pleading, we have an express original promise.
1. Sections 24 and 25, L. O. L., read thus:
“Sec. 24. No…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kaiser v. IdlemanOregon Supreme Court · 1910
- Dundee Investment Co. v. HornerOregon Supreme Court · 1897
- Creighton v. VincentOregon Supreme Court · 1881
- Blaskower v. SteelOregon Supreme Court · 1892
- Hislop v. MoldenhauerOregon Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by4 opinions
- Miles v. VeatchOregon Supreme Court · 1950
- Eilke v. RiceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Northwest Foundry & Furnace Co. v. Willamette Manufacturing & Supply Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1974
- Miles v. VeatchOregon Supreme Court · 1950