Gilbert v. Sharkey
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mr. Justice Benson. This is an action by H. C. Gilbert and Arthur W. Fisher, partners, doing business under the firm name and style of Gilbert & Fisher, against John P. Sharkey. Plaintiffs base this action upon an express contract for the payment of money. The terms of the contract are of no importance in the discussion of the questions involved.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mr. Justice Benson. This is an action by H. C. Gilbert and Arthur W. Fisher, partners, doing business under the firm name and style of Gilbert & Fisher, against John P. Sharkey. Plaintiffs base this action upon an express contract for the payment of money. The terms of the contract are of no importance in the discussion of the questions involved. The complaint, inter alia, alleges: “That defendant, John P. Sharkey, was during all the times hereinafter mentioned, doing business under the name and style of Jno. P. Sharkey…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Benson
1. The first assignment of error is based upon the ruling of the trial court in admitting in evidence, over *326objection, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit A, which the bill of exceptions refers to as a contract. None of the exhibits referred to in the bill of exceptions are attached thereto, nor are any of them in the files here, except the minute-book of the corporation, so the question raised is not properly before us, and cannot be considered.
2, 3. The other assignments of error attack the findings of fact made by the court and the conclusions of law based thereon. There was but one issue before the trial…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Stark v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Morris v. LeachOregon Supreme Court · 1917
- Lee v. EllisOregon Supreme Court · 1927
- Skow v. ShulpsOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. WalkerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933