Opinion · Orlaw Oregon

MATSON v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC., 54 Or. App. 558 (1981)

MATSON, Appellant, v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC., Respondent., 635 P.2d 409 (Or. Ct. App. 1981)

Type
Opinion
Court
Orlaw Oregon
Jurisdiction
Orlaw
Date
1981-11-02
Topic
general

MATSON v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC., 54 Or. App. 558 (1981) 635 P.2d 409 MATSON, Appellant, v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC., Respondent. No. 205-192, CA A20397Oregon Court of Appeals.Argued and submitted June 24, 1981 Affirmed November 2, 1981 Appeal from District Court, Multnomah County.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MATSON v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC., 54 Or. App. 558 (1981). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MATSON v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC.,54 Or. App. 558(1981)
635 P.2d 409
MATSON,Appellant,v. RETRIEVER TOWING, INC.,Respondent.
No. 205-192, CA A20397
Oregon Court of Appeals.
Argued and submitted June 24, 1981
Affirmed November 2, 1981
Appeal from District Court, Multnomah County.

William C. Beers, Judge.
Nathan D. Sanders, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. On the brief were Frank J. Dixon and Sanders Dixon, Portland.

Steven D. Stadum, Certified Law Student, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Michael A. Lewis and Ragen, Roberts, O'Scannlain, Robertson Neill, Portland.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Roberts and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.Page 559
PER CURIAM.
This is an action for conversion. The trial court granted defendant's motion for a directed verdict on the ground that plaintiff had failed to prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence.

The record on appeal includes a tape cassette audio record. Plaintiff's brief when referring to or reciting evidence fails to make reference to the location of the evidence in the audio record. That violates Rule 25.15, Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Rules of Appellate Procedure. We will not search the tape.

Affirmed.Page 560