O'Day v. Spencer
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 2. The plaintiff as executrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Thomas O’Day, seeks to recover for certain legal services alleged to have been performed by him for the defendant. The first cause of action is upon a stated account for $1,765.15 rendered December 28, 1914, upon which $1,650 has been paid.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 2. The plaintiff as executrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Thomas O’Day, seeks to recover for certain legal services alleged to have been performed by him for the defendant. The first cause of action is upon a stated account for $1,765.15 rendered December 28, 1914, upon which $1,650 has been paid. The second cause of action is for $1,000 for services growing out of the defendant’s case against the Monarch Transportation Company, in which it is claimed that the company paid $500 of that amount to the defendant, who then promised…
1Opinion of the CourtJohns, J.
1. As the case was tried by the court without a jury, its findings of fact are as binding and conclusive upon this court as a verdict, and must be sustained if they are within the issues and there is any evidence to support them: Wheelock v. Richardson, 91 Or. 87 (178 Pac. 377); Puffer v. Badley, 92 Or. 360 (181 Pac. 1, 4 A. L. R. 1561). There is no dispute as to the first cause of action.
2. The trial court received evidence tending to show that the charges specified in the second and third causes of action were not included or embraced within the stated account upon which the first cause is…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Puffer v. BadleyOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- Nichols v. ScottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1840
- Normandin v. GrattonOregon Supreme Court · 1885
- Wheelock v. RichardsonOregon Supreme Court · 1919