Herbert v. Dufur

Citations

• 23 Or. 462
• 32 P. 302
• 1893 Ore. LEXIS 46

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal — Assignments op Eeeob — Code, ji 537.— It is important that each specification of error be complete within itself so as to clearly present the question involved. Assignments that the court “erred in overruling all of defendant’s objections to the evidence offered by plaintiff, and in not sustaining each and all of such objections,” and that the court erred “in sustaining and in not overruling each and all of plaintiff’s objections to the evidence,” are too indefinite and general, under Hill’s Code, | 537, requiring the notice of appeal to specify the grounds of error with reasonable certainty. Thompson v. Ins. Co. 21 Or. 466, approved.</p> <p>2. Teial — Nonsuit.— A nonsuit should not be granted for insufficiency of evidence unless it appears that, admitting plaintiff’s testimony to be true, and giving plaintiff the benefit of every inference fairly deducible therefrom, he has still failed to support his action, for it is sufficient if the evidence offered tends to show facts sufficient to sustain the action, even though remotely.</p> <p>3. Appeal — Nonsuit.— Objections that plaintiff’s testimony is inconsistent and his conduct and testimony irreconcilable, and that a fair construction thereof will lead to the conclusion that defendant never made the promise alleged by plaintiff, and that plaintiff never so understood it, are addressed solely to the consideration of the jury, and are not to he considered on appeal in determining whether a nonsuit should have been granted.</p>