19 Or. 186 | Or. | 1890
delivered the opinion of the court.
This was an action to recover the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars as commissions for the sale of land by plaintiff as a real estate broker. The action was tried by the court without a jury by consent of the parties. After hearing the evidence, the court found as facts that the defendants agreed to pay the plaintiff the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, if plaintiff would sell for the defendants certain lands described, but that he had failed to sell the same, or to procure a purchaser who entered into a binding contract for the purchase; and as a matter of law, that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover anything in the action, but the defendants were entitled to recover their costs and disbursements, and judgment was rendered accordingly.
The bill of exceptions contains all the evidence, and the error mainly assigned is, error in the court in finding the facts as above stated. But this court cannot look into the bill of exceptions to ascertain the facts, as the findings of the court are conclusive upon us.
In Hallock v. City of Portland, 8 Or. 29, it was held that when a case is tried before the court without the intervention of a jury, the findings of the court upon the
And for this purpose the judgment is reversed, and it is so ordered, and that the costs and disbursements abide the result.