Case ID: or_230/html/0379-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued March 5,
    affirmed April 4, 1962
    HAYNER v. BURNS et ux
    370 P. 2d 235
    
      Bruce J. Manley, Medford, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was John M. Ross, Medford.
    
      Ervin B. Hogan, Medford, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Frohnmayer, Lowry, Hogan & Deatherage, Medford.
    Before McAllister, Chief Justice, and Warner, Sloan and O’Connell, Justices.
   PER CURIAM.

In his abstract and brief plaintiff states that this is a proceeding in equity for the dissolution of a partnership and an accounting. It was claimed that plaintiff and defendant Robert Burns formed a partnership to exploit some mining claims in Colorado.

At the conclusion of the trial and later by a written opinion, the trial court found a complete lack of any evidence sustaining plaintiff’s claim. We agree with the court. The record is devoid of any evidence to establish a claim of right of any kind in favor of plaintiff against defendants. The facts are of interest only to the parties. They do not justify statement here.

Decree affirmed.