Case Name: FULLMER, Respondent, v. CITY LUMBER COMPANY et al, Appellants
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1969-12-31
Citations: 254 Or. 622
Docket Number: 
Parties: FULLMER, Respondent, v. CITY LUMBER COMPANY et al, Appellants.
Judges: Before Perry, Chief Justice, and McAllister, Sloan, O’Connell, Goodwin, Denecke and Holman, Justices.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 254
Pages: 622–623

Head Matter:
Argued December 9,
affirmed December 31, 1969
FULLMER, Respondent, v. CITY LUMBER COMPANY et al, Appellants.
463 P. 2d 360
Mervin W. Brink, Hillsboro, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the brief were Brink & Moore, Hillsboro.
James McCaffery, Tigard, argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.
Before Perry, Chief Justice, and McAllister, Sloan, O’Connell, Goodwin, Denecke and Holman, Justices.
Goodwin, J., resigned December 19, 1969.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff, a lumber broker, brought this action to recover commissions for the sale of lumber he alleged were owed to him by defendant. The case was tried to the court without a jury. The trial court made findings in favor of plaintiff and entered judgment accordingly. Defendant appeals.
The defense was that plaintiff had been working as a partner with another broker named Larson and that the partnership had been overpaid. The trial court found that there had not been a partnership. There is evidence to support the trial court's findings and those findings, of course, have the validity of a jury verdict. Anaheim Co. v. Holcombe, 1967, 246 Or 541, 548, 426 P2d 743, 746.
Affirmed.