From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burnam v. Garon Development Corp.

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 5, 1983
669 P.2d 1186 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)

Summary

In Burnam v. Garon Development Corporation, 64 Or. App. 847, 669 P.2d 1186 (1983), the appeal was dismissed because it was not from a final judgment.

Summary of this case from Custom Harv. Oregon v. Smith Truck Tractor

Opinion

41-188; CA A24887

Argued and submitted June 22, 1983

Appeal dismissed October 5, 1983

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County.

Jon B. Lund, Judge.

Elden M. Rosenthal, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant. With him on the briefs was Rosenthal Greene, P.C., Portland.

Frederic P. Roehr, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Thomas Sauberli, Vergeer, Roehr Sweek, Robert D. Newell, and Black, Tremaine, Higgins, Lankton Krieger, Portland.

Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Appeal dismissed.


Plaintiff appeals from an adverse judgment entered after a jury trial. She contends that the trial court erred in striking claims of trespass from her complaint, and allegations of negligence in her personal injury claim.

Defendants move to dismiss the appeal, contending that it was taken from a judgment that does not dispose of all the claims involved in the case and lacks an express determination that there is no just reason for delay, ORCP 67B, and, therefore, is not a final order within the meaning of ORS 19.010(2)(e). We earlier denied defendants' motion with leave to renew it.

At oral argument we encouraged the parties to enter into a stipulation, as was suggested in Osborne v. International Harvester Company, 60 Or. App. 563, 564 n 2, 654 P.2d 1148 (1982), agreeing to dismiss the already abandoned cross-claims. At that time we were of the opinion that defendants' earlier motion to dismiss the appeal, based on lack of proper service on the clerk of the trial court, had been properly denied. We no longer hold that view. See McQuary v. Bel Air Convalescent Home, 64 Or. App. 528, 669 P.2d 348 (1983). We now hold that, because the judgment appealed from fails to dispose of the cross-claim brought by Dale Industries, Inc. against defendants Garon Development Corporation and Leisure Resources Inc. for Dale's costs in defending plaintiff's action, it is not a final judgment within the meaning of ORS 19.010(2)(e).

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Burnam v. Garon Development Corp.

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 5, 1983
669 P.2d 1186 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)

In Burnam v. Garon Development Corporation, 64 Or. App. 847, 669 P.2d 1186 (1983), the appeal was dismissed because it was not from a final judgment.

Summary of this case from Custom Harv. Oregon v. Smith Truck Tractor
Case details for

Burnam v. Garon Development Corp.

Case Details

Full title:BURNAM, Appellant, v. GARON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION et al, Respondents

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 5, 1983

Citations

669 P.2d 1186 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)
669 P.2d 1186

Citing Cases

Custom Harv. Oregon v. Smith Truck Tractor

That case is obviously distinguishable. In Burnam v. Garon Development Corporation, 64 Or. App. 847, 669 P.2d…

Burnam v. Garon Development Corp.

Before addressing the merits of this appeal, we deal with defendants' assertion that it should be dismissed…