Legal Opinion

Ausplund v. Haralampus

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1951PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLusk, J.

Plaintiff recovered a judgment from the three defendants, Sam Haralampus, G-ust Haralampus and Esther Haralampus, upon two promissory notes executed by Sam Haralampus. The other two defendants, to whom we shall refer as the appellants, have appealed.

The trial was before the court without a jury. By •objections to the findings and requests for findings the appellants have raised the question whether there is any evidence in the record to support the judgment. For a proper determination of that question it will be necessary to refer to the complaint, which, so far as now material, consists of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Elliott v. MosgroveOregon Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Home v. SellingOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Wright v. MortonOregon Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Logan v. ParsonOregon Supreme Court · 1916
  5. St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Oregon Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal ChurchDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1935

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. North Pacific Lumber Co. v. MooreOregon Supreme Court · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API