Cloyes v. Eckern

Decided March 5, 1912

Oregon Supreme Court · decided 1912-03-05

From Multnomah: Calvin U. Gantenbein, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by Harry H. Cloyes and others against Anthon Eckern, to recover $20,000 as commission said to be due them on an alleged contract with the defendant, which they say they performed, to find for him a purchaser, ready, able, and willing to buy 2,000 shares in a lumbering corporation at the price of $200,000. The complaint is traversed in every material particular.

Relies on Wills v. Palmer Lumber Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1912-03-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1951

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Justice Burnett

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The record in this case comes to us containing a bill of exceptions formulated since Section 3, Article VII, Constitution of Oregon, was promulgated in its amended form. Under the sanction of the rule there established, the bill has attached to it the whole testimony, the instructions of the court to the jury, and other matters deemed material to the decision of the appeal.

¶3After careful consideration of all the matters thus submitted and due attention to the arguments of counsel, we are of the opinion, as authorized by that constitutional provision, that the judgment challenged on this appeal is such as should have been rendered in the case, and the same is therefore affirmed, notwithstanding the errors alleged to have been committed during the trial. Wills v. Palmer Lumber Co., 58 Or. 536 (115 Pac. 417) ; Atherton v. Walling, 61 Or. — (121 Pac. 796).

¶4Affirmed.