Rohr v. Isaacs
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Multnomah County. This was an action commenced in a justice’s court by the respondent, to recover from the appellant the sum of forty-seven dollars, less a credit of twenty dollars and sixty-four cents, which he allowed to appellant. The balance claimed was twenty-six dollars and thirty-six cents.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Multnomah County. This was an action commenced in a justice’s court by the respondent, to recover from the appellant the sum of forty-seven dollars, less a credit of twenty dollars and sixty-four cents, which he allowed to appellant. The balance claimed was twenty-six dollars and thirty-six cents. The appellant filed an answer, • admitting that the respondent had a just demand for forty-five dollars, but claimed a larger credit, amounting to thirty dollars and ninety-six cents. He then, for a further answer, by way of a counter-claim, alleged that the respondent was indebted to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Kelly, C. J.:
The appellant claims that the court erred in its refusal to render judgment in his favor on the pleadings, as filed in *453the justice’s court, and in allowing the respondent to file a reply in the circuit court. The statute in relation to the proceedings in justices’ courts, section 80, page 473, of the code, provides that “the appellate court may, in furtherance of justice, and upon such terms as may be just, allow the pleadings in the action to l\'u amended, so as not to substantially change the issuw/^d in the justice’s court, or introduce any new cause of ¡y '11 9£…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Moss v. PriestThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lafayette v. BassSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- Bree v. JalbertNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1965
- Julio Diniero v. United States Lines CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Herrlin v. Brown & McCabeOregon Supreme Court · 1914