# Bailey v. Benton County

> Oregon Supreme Court · November 1, 1910 · 61 Or. 390

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6902488

## Case

- **Full name:** BAILEY v. BENTON COUNTY
- **Court:** Oregon Supreme Court
- **Decided:** November 1, 1910
- **Citations:** 61 Or. 390; 111 P. 376; 1910 Ore. LEXIS 211
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Moore
- **Judges:** McBbede, McBride, Moore, Took
- **Cited by:** 14 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6902488

## Opinion text

Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Moore.
This is a motion to strike from an abstract certain testimony, on the ground that it was not copied from the bill of exceptions. The transcript sent up contains a bill of exceptions showing that it was signed by the judge, and appended to the record is the certificate of the clerk, wherein he asserts that the transcript contains a full, complete and true copy of the bill of exceptions. An examination of the bill referred to reveals that it *392 embraces the identical testimony assailed. If any mistake has been made in the appellant’s abstract, the respondent can file an additional abstract and- have the record corrected. Rule 5 of the Supreme Court ( 50 Or. 572 : 91 Pac. viii ).
• Until an amendment has been made in the manner indicated, the motion should be denied; and it is ordered.
Motion Denied.
Decided April 9, 1912.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6902488. Public record. Not legal advice.