Plinsky v. Nolan
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
*404 Opinion Per Curiam.
In effect, the trial court said to the plaintiff, “You are not entitled to $135, hut if you will accept a judgment for $90 it will be entered in your favor for that amount.” Piling the remitter quoted amounted to an acceptance of that offer and a consent to such a judgment. It was tantamount to an agreement that all alleged errors were waived and the case settled on the proposed basis of a judgment for $90, with costs and disbursements. It is equivalent to a judgment by confession according to Schmidt v. Oregon Gold Min. Co., 28 Or. 9 ( 40 Pac. 406, 1014 , 52 Am. St. Rep. 759 ) and Twitchell v. Risley, 56 Or. 226 ( 107 Pac. 459 ). It is only from a judgment or decree other than one by confession or for want of answer that an appeal will lie: Section 549, L. O. L. Having invited and accepted the judgment entered, and so having consented to it, the plaintiff cannot appeal from it.
The motion to dismiss the appeal is allowed.
Appeal Dismissed..
Mr. Chief Justice McBride, Mr: Justice Moore and Mr. Justice Ramsey concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.