288 P. 196 (Or. 1930), School Dist. No. 106 OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

Citation288 P. 196, 132 Or. 673
Opinion Judge[132 Or. 675] BROWN, J. (after stating the facts as above).
Party NameSCHOOL DIST. NO. 106 OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY v. NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY CO.
Attorney[132 Or. 674] Lamar Tooze, of Portland (Jay S. Moltzner and Jaureguy & Tooze, all of Portland, on the brief), for appellant. O. G. Edwards, of Portland (Robert F. Maguire, of Portland, on the brief), for respondent.
Judge PanelCOSHOW, C.J., and BEAN and BELT, JJ., concur.
Case DateMay 20, 1930
CourtSupreme Court of Oregon

Page 196

288 P. 196 (Or. 1930)

132 Or. 673

SCHOOL DIST. NO. 106 OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY

v.

NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY CO.

Supreme Court of Oregon

May 20, 1930

Department 2.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; G. H. McCulloch, Judge.

Action by School District No. 106 of Clackamas County against the New Amsterdam Casualty Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

The plaintiff, by this action, seeks to recover from the defendant corporation, as surety on the official bond of one Russell W. Robertson, clerk of the plaintiff school district, for the school year 1924-25, the sum of $712.34, asserted shortage in the accounts of the school fund within the period named.

In its answer, the defendant admitted the execution of a bond, but denied the shortage in the funds of the clerk, and for its defense pleaded both release and estoppel.

The cause was tried to the court without a jury, with the result that plaintiff recovered from defendant a judgment for the full sum demanded; i. e., $712.34, with costs and disbursements, together with $200 as attorney's fees.

The defendant, appealing, presents to the court the following propositions: (1) That, in the absence of any finding on the issues arising out of its affirmative defenses, the court was without power to render judgment against defendant; (2) that, under the admitted facts of the cause, it was released of all liability; (3) that the court was not authorized by contract, or by statutory enactment, to include in the judgment the recovery of attorney's fees for the plaintiff.

[132 Or. 674] Lamar Tooze, of Portland (Jay S. Moltzner and Jaureguy & Tooze, all of Portland, on the brief), for appellant.

O. G. Edwards, of Portland (Robert F. Maguire, of Portland, on the brief), for respondent.

[132 Or. 675] BROWN, J. (after stating the facts as above).

At the outset it will be helpful to note that the receipt or alleged "release" invoked in defense of plaintiff's cause arose from and in the settlement of a claim for $2,587.75, based upon a different policy and covering a different period of time, and for peculations other than those which resulted in the filing of this action.

With respect to the first proposition presented by defendant, it is proper to observe the holding of this court in a number of instances to the effect that, when a law action is tried to the court without a jury, it is the duty of the court to enter findings of fact upon all material issues, and, upon the failure of the court to make such findings upon all material issues, the judgment is void. Oregon Home Builders v. Montgomery Investment Co., 94 Or. 349, 184 P. 487; Maeder Steel Products Co. v. Zanello, 109 Or. 562, 220 P. 155. See Or. L. § 158. Since these decisions were rendered, this section of our Code has twice been amended. See chapter 211, p. 396, Gen. Laws of Oregon 1925, and chapter 165, p. 184, Gen. Laws of Oregon 1927. As amended in 1927, it reads:

"Upon the trial of an issue of fact by the court, its decision shall be given in writing, and filed with the clerk during the term or within twenty days thereafter. The decision shall consist of either general or special findings without argument or reason therefor. All parties appearing in the case shall have the right to [132 Or. 676] request either special or general findings, and if any findings are requested by any party litigant such requested findings shall be served upon all the other parties who have appeared in the case and such adverse parties may, within ten days after such service, present to the trial judge objections to such proposed findings or any part thereof and request other, different, or additional findings. When the findings are prepared by the court or judge thereof, a copy of such findings shall be served upon, or mailed to, all parties appearing in the case or their attorneys ten days before the same are filed, and any party litigant may, within such ten days, object thereto and request other, different, or additional findings. Nothing herein contained shall prevent the court from shortening the time in which to file objections or request other, different, or additional findings, or prevent the parties to the case stipulating or agreeing to the findings to be entered."

Page 198

It appears from the record herein that, at the conclusion of the testimony and argument by counsel, the court ruled that the defendant had failed to sustain either of its affirmative defenses, and held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover a judgment for $712.34, with $200 attorney's fees. The attorneys were instructed to prepare their findings, "serve a copy of it upon opposing counsel, mail them to me at Baker, and I will sign and return them for filing." The defendant made no objections to the findings and no request for different or additional findings. This fact would not indicate that it was dissatisfied with the findings as made. In view of the foregoing, reversible error cannot be successfully predicated upon the court's failure to find in accord with the theory of the defendant.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's cause of action was not such as to justify the court in giving a judgment for plaintiff's attorney fees. [132 Or. 677] Section 6355, Or. L., as amended by chapter 184, p. 208, General Laws of Oregon 1927, reads:

"Whenever any suit or action is brought in any courts of this state upon any policy of insurance of any kind or nature whatsoever, the plaintiff, in addition to the amount which he may recover, shall also be allowed and shall recover as part of said judgment such sum as the court or jury may adjudge to be reasonable as attorney's fees in said suit or action; provided, that settlement is not made within six months from date proof of loss is filed with the company. * * *"

Note the broad and inclusive language of the statute, " any policy of insurance of any kind or nature whatsoever. " This language is so plain, and its meaning so clear, that construction is neither required nor permitted.

It is contended, among other things, that plaintiff's complaint is defective, in that it fails to allege sufficient facts to authorize a judgment for attorney's fees in this action. Plaintiff alleged:

"That said defendant, although demand has been made upon it therefor more than 6 months prior to the filing of this action, has failed, neglected and refused, and now refuses to pay to plaintiff said sum of $712.34, or any part thereof, and plaintiff has been damaged in the full sum of said $712.34 and interest since November 9, 1926;

"That the sum of $250 is a reasonable sum to be allowed as attorney's fees in this action."

After hearing the testimony, the court found "that defendant, although demand...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • 21 P.2d 187 (Or. 1933), Spicer v. Benefit Ass'n of Ry. Employees
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • 18 Abril 1933
    ...Or. 467, 1 P.2d 1100, 7 P.2d 805; Lewis v. Continental Cas. Co., 135 Or. 170, 295 P. 450; School Dist. No. 106 v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. 196; Dolan v. Continental Cas. Co., 133 Or. 252, 289 P. 1057; Eaid v. National Cas. Co., 122 Or. 547, 259 P. 902; Ocean A. & G. C......
  • 495 P.2d 1215 (Or.App. 1972), Oregon State Highway Commission v. DeLong Corp.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • 7 Abril 1972
    ...Murray v. Firemen's Ins. Co., 121 Or. 165, 254 P. 817; Goodspeed v. Duby, 131 Or. 275, 283 P. 6; School Dist. v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. 196; Dolan v. Continental Cas. Co., 133 Or. 252, 289 P. 1057.' 145 Or. at 621--622, 28 P.2d at 884. See also, New York Life Insurance ......
  • 230 F.Supp. 411 (D.Or. 1964), Civ. 61-381, Close-Smith v. Conley
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 9th Circuit United States District Court (Oregon)
    • 20 Mayo 1964
    ...use of the rules of statutory construction is not permitted. School District No. 106 of Clackamas County v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. 196; Whitlock v. United States Inter-Insurance Association, 138 Or. 383, 6 P.2d Counsel for defendant, in support of their argument for......
  • 505 P.2d 939 (Or.App. 1973), Neuhaus v. Federico
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • 2 Febrero 1973
    ...granted by statute. Monaghan v. School District No. 1, 211 Or. 360, 315 P.2d 797 (1957); School Dist. 106 v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. 196 (1930); Baxter v. Davis, 58 Or. 109, 112 P. 410, 113 P. 438 The relevant statutes provide: '(1) The State Board of Education in accord......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
17 cases
  • 505 P.2d 939 (Or.App. 1973), Neuhaus v. Federico
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • 2 Febrero 1973
    ...granted by statute. Monaghan v. School District No. 1, 211 Or. 360, 315 P.2d 797 (1957); School Dist. 106 v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. 196 (1930); Baxter v. Davis, 58 Or. 109, 112 P. 410, 113 P. 438 (1911). The relevant statutes provide: '(1) The State Board of Education i......
  • 88 F.2d 536 (9th Cir. 1937), 8102, American Surety Co. of New York v. Fischer Warehouse Co.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 15 Febrero 1937
    ...Or. 615, 28 P.2d 882, Christensen, Inc., v. Hansen Const. Co., 142 Or. 549, 21 P.2d 195, and School District v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. With respect to the appellate court, however, only two conditions are specified in the statute which must be fulfilled before attorney'......
  • 21 P.2d 187 (Or. 1933), Spicer v. Benefit Ass'n of Ry. Employees
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court of Oregon
    • 18 Abril 1933
    ...Or. 467, 1 P.2d 1100, 7 P.2d 805; Lewis v. Continental Cas. Co., 135 Or. 170, 295 P. 450; School Dist. No. 106 v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 132 Or. 673, 288 P. 196; Dolan v. Continental Cas. Co., 133 Or. 252, 289 P. 1057; Eaid v. National Cas. Co., 122 Or. 547, 259 P. 902; Ocean A. & G. C......
  • 145 So. 228 (Miss. 1933), 30258, Morris v. Vandiver
    • United States
    • Mississippi United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • 2 Enero 1933
    ...Schwing v. McClure, 120 Ohio St. 335, 166 N.E. 230; School Dist. No. 106 of Clackamas County v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co., 132 Ore. 673, 288 P. 196; Crawford v. Klamath County School Dist. No. 7, 68 Ore. 388, 137 P. 217, 50 L.R.A. (N.S.) 147, Ann. Cas. 1915C, 477; Baxter v. Davis, 58 Ore. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT