Legal Opinion

Zuccala v. Suncrest Orchards, Inc.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 23, 1929PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, C. J.

The court’s ruling on the motions for nonsuit and directed verdict must be sustained. There is sufficient evidence to support the findings in favor of plaintiff. The findings of a court in the trial of an action at law have the effect and force of the verdict of a jury: Or. L., §' 159.

This court has frequently held that the matter of opening up a case for taking further testimony rests in the sound discretion of the trial court. The court does not favor deciding a case on a technical oversight of counsel. The assignment was in writing and no attempt made to dispute it. A doubt was raised…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Sutton v. ClarkeOregon Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Kiessling v. OrthOregon Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Larsen v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Stehle v. Department of Motor VehiclesOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Mullennex v. DraperOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Green v. HaywardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975
  5. Bobillot v. Clackamas CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API