## Facts

- J.I. Case Credit Corporation owned a repossessed tractor located in the woods near Morton, Washington.
- In mid-February 1972, Frank J. Thompson contacted J.I. Case’s credit supervisor (Henderson) about buying the tractor.
- Henderson agreed to sell the tractor to Thompson for $1,000, “as is, where is,” to be paid in cash, with Thompson to retrieve it.
- On March 1, Thompson picked up the tractor and brought it to Oregon.
- Thompson and Henderson disputed when Thompson notified Henderson that he had retrieved the tractor (mid-March vs. end of March).
- Around March 10–12, John A. Petersen telephoned Henderson about buying the same tractor.
- Because Henderson had not heard from Thompson, he assumed Thompson was no longer interested and agreed to sell the tractor to Petersen.
- Petersen sued in Oregon to recover possession of the tractor from Thompson.
- The case was tried to the court without a jury; after Petersen rested, the trial court granted Thompson’s motion for a nonsuit and entered judgment for Thompson.

## Issues

1. In a non-jury trial, does a motion labeled “nonsuit” test only whether the plaintiff has made a prima facie case, or may the judge weigh evidence and decide the merits?
2. Whether the trial court erred by entering judgment for Thompson after Petersen’s case-in-chief, given evidence that could support Petersen’s ownership claim.
3. What standard of appellate review applies when such a motion results in a judgment in a bench trial.

## Decision

- The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed.
- In a bench trial, a motion styled as a “nonsuit” may be treated as an involuntary dismissal on the merits, allowing the judge to weigh evidence and resolve factual disputes.
- The appellate court reviewed the ruling as a merits determination, not merely as a prima facie sufficiency decision.
- The record supported the trial court’s determination that Thompson had the superior claim to the tractor based on the earlier transaction and possession.

## Legal Principles

- In a case tried to the court, a mid-trial motion labeled a “nonsuit” may operate as an involuntary dismissal on the merits, permitting credibility determinations and fact finding at that stage.
- On appeal from such a merits judgment in a bench trial, the reviewing court does not reweigh evidence and will uphold factual determinations if supported by evidence in the record.
- Where a seller mistakenly makes inconsistent sales of the same goods, the fact finder may award superior rights to the earlier purchaser who consummated the transaction and took possession, over a later purchaser whose agreement occurred after that transfer.

## Conclusion

The court held that, in a non-jury trial, a “nonsuit” after the plaintiff rests can be treated as an involuntary dismissal on the merits, and it affirmed the judgment for Thompson because the trial court’s ownership determination was supported by the evidence and was not subject to reweighing on appeal.


Petersen v. Thompson, 506 P.2d 697 (Or. 1973)