King v. Mitchell

• Decision Date: 28 March 1950
• Citation: King v. Mitchell, 188 Or. 434, 216 P.2d 269 (Or. 1950)
• Parties: Fay KING, respondent, v. Murcell MITCHELL, appellant.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

216 P.2d 269

188 Or. 434

Fay KING, respondent, v. Murcell MITCHELL, appellant.

Supreme Court of Oregon.

March 28, 1950

Hallock, Donald, Banta & Silven, of Baker, for the petition.

Collier & Bernard of Portland, and Yokum & Campbell, of John Day, contra.

Before LUSK, C. J., and BRAND, BAILEY and HAY, JJ.

LUSK, Chief Justice.

In a petition for a rehearing, supported by a brief, the respondent requests the court'to modify or clarify its opinion so as to permit the respondent to now apply to the trial court for permission to cross examine the defendant and his witnesses and submit further proof in opposition to the showing presented by the appellant which the trial court adjudged was insufficient and this court has now determined was sufficient if uncontroverted to require vacation of the default and judgment against the appellantMurcell Mitchell.'

The motion to modify the opinion is denied.As to the request for clarification, we held that the court erred in denying the motion to vacate the default and remanded the cause 'for further proceedings in conformity to this...