Whitney Chevrolet Co. v. Hatch

• Decision Date: 31 January 1928
• Docket Number: 21032.
• Citation: 263 P. 602,146 Wash. 440
• Parties: WHITNEY CHEVROLET CO. v. HATCH.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

263 P. 602

146 Wash. 440

WHITNEY CHEVROLET CO. v. HATCH.

No. 21032.

Supreme Court of Washington

January 31, 1928

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, Grays Harbor County; Abel, Judge.

Action by the Whitney Chevrolet Company against W. Hatch. From a judgment granting part of the relief demanded, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

E. S. Avery, of Elma, for appellant.

A. P. Wilson, of Montesano, for respondent.

MAIN, J.

In the complaint in this case three causes of action are stated, one for $68.32 for gasoline, oil, and automobile supplies sold by the plaintiff to the defendant, one for $126.40, the alleged balance of the purchase price on a Chevrolet automobile, and one upon a promissory note for $119.80. The answer denied liability upon all of the causes of action. By reply, the affirmative matter in the answer was denied. The cause was tried to the court without a jury, and resulted in findings of fact and a judgment awarding to the plaintiff the Chevrolet automobile mentioned in the complaint, and denied a recovery upon the other items. From this judgment the defendant appeals.

No statement of facts or bill of exceptions has been brought to this court, and therefore the only question is whether the findings support the judgment. The appellant invokes the general rule that a judgment upon issues not made by the pleadings is erroneous, and may be set aside or reversed in a proper proceeding for that purpose. This rule, however, is not applicable in the present case, because, there being no statement of facts or bill of exceptions, it will be presumed that the evidence introduced upon the trial supported the findings, and the pleadings will be deemed amended to conform thereto. Pierce v. Pierce, 52 Wash. 679, 101 P. 358; Holden v. Romano, 61 Wash. 458, 112 P. 489; McCreery v. Carter, 73 Wash. 394, 131 P. 1125.

The judgment will be affirmed.

MACKINTOSH, C.J., and ASKREN, HOLCOMB, and FULLERTON, JJ., concur.