Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

BARBOUR v. SUCHY

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, Vina S. Barbour, brought this action for wrongful attachment against the defendant, Mary E. Suchy, doing business as Acme Credit Bureau. The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $500 general damages and $1,000 punitive damages and from the judgment based on said verdict, the defendant appeals.

Defendant's brief contains three assignments of error, none of which comply with the rules of this court. See rule 16, Rules of the Supreme Court, 203 Or. 710, 724. Two of the assignments of error challenge particular instructions given by the court to the jury and the third assignment states that the court erred in submitting the issue of punitive damages to the jury. None of the assignments set out haec verba any objection made in the court below, state whether any objection was made in the court below and if made, where such objection may be found in the bill of exceptions. In view of this flagrant violation of our rules, we decline to consider these assignments of error. See Melgreen v. Frank L. McGuire, Inc., 214 Or. 128, 327 P.2d 1114.

The judgment is affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BARBOUR v. SUCHY
(Jun 24, 1959)