explaining that “the requirement of separate actions has been abrogated in the federal courts by FRCP 14, the rule after which ORCP 22 C was patterned,” and that, under the corresponding federal rule “the third-party claim can accelerate determination of the liability, if any, between the third-party plaintiff and the third-party defendant”
Summary of this case from Marton v. S, V. Ater Constr. Co.May 16, 1989.
explaining that “the requirement of separate actions has been abrogated in the federal courts by FRCP 14, the rule after which ORCP 22 C was patterned,” and that, under the corresponding federal rule “the third-party claim can accelerate determination of the liability, if any, between the third-party plaintiff and the third-party defendant”
Summary of this case from Marton v. S, V. Ater Constr. Co.Full title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: May 16, 1989
That is accurate, but it is not sufficient to decide this case. The only case interpreting ORS 811.700(1)(c)…
Tri-Met, Inc. v. AlbrechtArgued and submitted September 9, 1988 Reversed and remanded to referee February 8, 1989 reconsideration…