Bush v. Mitchell
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Marion: George H. Burnett, Judge. This is a motion to dismiss an appeal. ,The facts are that on February twenty-fourth, eighteen hundred and ninety-four, the plaintiff, having commenced an action against the defendants, obtained a judgment therein for twenty-four thousand five hundred and fifty-six dollars and fifty cents, the amount due on a promissory note, containing a provision for reasonable attorney’s fees in case “suit” was instituted for its collection.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Marion: George H. Burnett, Judge. This is a motion to dismiss an appeal. ,The facts are that on February twenty-fourth, eighteen hundred and ninety-four, the plaintiff, having commenced an action against the defendants, obtained a judgment therein for twenty-four thousand five hundred and fifty-six dollars and fifty cents, the amount due on a promissory note, containing a provision for reasonable attorney’s fees in case “suit” was instituted for its collection. The complaint in said action, in addition to the usual averments, also alleged that one thousand two hundred dollars was…
1Per curiam
The rule is universal that a party will not, without the consent of his adversary, be permitted to split up his demand and maintain separate *94actions on the several parts: Little v. City of Portland, 26 Or. 235 (37 Pac. 911). So, too, it is equally well settled that a party will not be permitted to maintain separate appeals from parts of a judgment or decree: Elliott on Appellate Procedure, § 18. “There is a class of cases,” says the same learned author, (Elliott on Appellate Procedure, § 98,) “which apparently form an exception to the general rule that an appeal will not lie from part of a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Little v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1894
- Portland Construction Co. v. O'NeilOregon Supreme Court · 1893
- Moore v. FloydOregon Supreme Court · 1872
- Inverarity v. StowellOregon Supreme Court · 1882
- Shook v. ColohanOregon Supreme Court · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Whalen v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Pacific General Contractors, Inc. v. Slate Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
- Moores v. MooresOregon Supreme Court · 1899
- Schlecht v. BlissOregon Supreme Court · 1975
- Everding & Farrell v. ToftOregon Supreme Court · 1915
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.