Hand Mfg. Co. v. Marks
| Decision Date | 15 August 1898 |
| Parties | HAND MFG. CO. v. MARKS et al. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Multnomah county; Loyal B. Stearns, Judge.
Suit by the Hand Manufacturing Company against J.S. Marks and others. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appealed. Motion to advance cause on trial calendar. Denied.
Thos. N. Strong, F.L. Keenan, Guy G. Willis, M.W. Smith, and A.T. Lewis, for appellant.
Cake & Cake and A.C. Emmons, for respondent.
This is a motion to advance the above cause upon the calendar for hearing, based upon section 3677, Hill's Ann.Laws Or., which provides, among other things, as follows: By a fair intendment, the language of the act states simply a rule of procedure to be observed by the circuit courts, in which it is provided such cases shall be instituted. The injunction that they shall be tried by such court without unnecessary delay is an unmistakable indication that the trial, and not the appellate, court, was intended. The plain purpose of the act is to promote an early trial in the interest of a deserving class of persons, many of whom are dependent (as we have said in Falconio v. Larsen, 31 Or. 137, 48 P. 703) upon their recent earnings for the sustenance of themselves and those dependent upon them, and to make the wages of labor speedily available. This purpose is in most instances subserved when the trial court has given the parties a hearing; and hence it is evident that the legislature deemed it sufficient for all practicable purposes that the court of original jurisdiction be required to give precedence to cases coming within the purview of the act. At any rate, the language employed indicates such to be the intendment, and we cannot invade the legislative domain to give it broader scope. The motion will be denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial