Close v. Close
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Clackamas: T. A. McBride, Judge. Suit by Lizzie E. Close against David H. Close, in which there was a decree for plaintiff. Defendant appealed, but, having failed to file the printed abstract of the record required by Buies 4 and 9 of the court, (24 Or. 595-597,) the respondent moved to dismiss the appeal.
1Per curiam
This is a motion to dismiss the appeal because the abstract of the record required by the rules of this court has not been served or filed. The defendant undertakés to excuse his failure in this regard on the ground that the evidence taken in the court below and upon which the decree was based has been lost or misplaced. There is no rule requiring the evidence to be printed in the abstract, and, besides, it is the duty of the appellant to bring into this court a perfect record, and if any part thereof has been lost or mislaid it must be supplied in the court below, and if not so supplied…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Boyd v. BurrelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Buckman v. WhitneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by6 opinions
- Reynolds v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Yamhill Sanitary Public Market Co. v. StrowbridgeOregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Morrison v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Lowery v. LowerySupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Berg v. GoldstoneOregon Supreme Court · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.