Fulton v. Earhart
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Marion County. This was an action for the recovery, as alleged in the complaint, of the agreed price of a number of horses, mares and colts, and of an undivided interest in a band of mares and colts sold by appellant to Huntington. While the action was pending in the lower Court, Huntington died, and Earhart, the administrator of his estate, was made defendant therein.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Marion County. This was an action for the recovery, as alleged in the complaint, of the agreed price of a number of horses, mares and colts, and of an undivided interest in a band of mares and colts sold by appellant to Huntington. While the action was pending in the lower Court, Huntington died, and Earhart, the administrator of his estate, was made defendant therein. The answer denies that any sale was made except-of an undivided one-third interest in a band of mares and colts to Huntington and one Morgan Beeves. It alleges that the purchase price at such sale was $333.33, and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Upton, J.:
The cause was first before the Court on a motion to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that there is no error assigned which is reviewable by this Court. On that motion the following opinion was expressed:
The first and third assignments simply assert that the Court erred in determining the preponderance of evidence. This is not an error of law. If there is no evidence tending to support a finding, and it so appears by the record, that may be a matter to be reviewed, but a finding of fact is not open to review simply on a question as to the preponderance of evidence.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- White v. Abernathy, Clark & Co.California Supreme Court · 1853
- Nelson v. LemmonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by3 opinions
- McClung v. McPhersonOregon Supreme Court · 1905
- Thomas v. BowenOregon Supreme Court · 1896
- Carver v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1892