Frederick & Nelson v. Bard
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Henry E. McGinn, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. The plaintiff, Frederick & Nelson, a corporation, declares in the usual form upon two promissory notes executed and delivered to it by W. H. Bard, amounting together to $750 of principal, besides interest as stated in the complaint. The answer admits the actual execution of the notes but makes two affirmative defenses.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Henry E. McGinn, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. The plaintiff, Frederick & Nelson, a corporation, declares in the usual form upon two promissory notes executed and delivered to it by W. H. Bard, amounting together to $750 of principal, besides interest as stated in the complaint. The answer admits the actual execution of the notes but makes two affirmative defenses. The first is, in substance, that the notes were executed without consideration, specifying under this head that the plaintiff had agreed to give him 10 per cent commission on the sale of all…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett
1, 2. The principal question urged for our consideration at the hearing was that the Circuit Court rendered a judgment on the day of hearing without making any findings of fact or conclusions of law, and that under the authority of Moody v. Richards, 29 Or. 262 (45 Pac. 777), and other like cases, the judgment had no foundation and was consequently void. The bill of exceptions sets out the judgment rendered on January 30,1912, and recites that “the defendant then and there excepted to the rendering and entering of said judgment, and his exception was then and there allowed.” In the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. RaderOregon Supreme Court · 1912
- Moody v. RichardsOregon Supreme Court · 1896
- Cloyes v. EckernOregon Supreme Court · 1912
- Taffe v. SmythOregon Supreme Court · 1912
- Thomas v. BowenOregon Supreme Court · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Matter of Marriage of MullinaxOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- Secor Investments, LLC v. AndereggCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
- National Council v. McGinnOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- Woodmansee v. WoodmanseeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
- Hair v. Oklahoma Corp. CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.