179 P. 253 | Or. | 1919
“The defendant’s evidence, however, showed that during the original negotiations with Morley he was acting in his own behalf, and the memoranda actually signed bound the defendant to sell tUe hops to Morley personally.”
The plaintiff could become the ownjer of the contract in but one of two ways: First, as principal in the original contract; or, second, by an assignment of Morley’s interest. We do not have the testimony which was before the trial court and it does not appear from the bill of exceptions that there was n<j) evidence of an assignment from Morley to the plaintiff produced at the trial. We have no right to assume that there was prejudicial error in giving instruction “B.”
. “No evidence was introduced in this action as to the market value of hops of the kind and quality of those of defendant, as aforesaid, at Mt. Angel, Oregon, the place of delivery, or the market price of such hops at any other place.” !
Instruction “C” has to do with the measure of damages. Without some evidence ¡tending to show that the plaintiff was damaged by reason of the failure
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.