Sternberg v. Lechman-Su
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtHadlock, J.
In this action for legal malpractice, the trial court dismissed plaintiffs third amended complaint for failure to state a claim, ORCP 21 A(8), and on the ground that the complaint showed that the action was not commenced within the time limited by statute, ORCP 21 A(9). On appeal, plaintiff challenges those rulings in her first and second assignments of error. We conclude that some of plaintiffs specifications of negligence state a claim and are not barred by the statute of limitations and, accordingly, reverse and remand for further proceedings on those specifications. We reject plaintiffs…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Stevens v. BisphamOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Gaston v. ParsonsOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- United States National Bank of Oregon v. DaviesOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Doe v. Lake Oswego School DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 2013
- Kaseberg v. Davis Wright Tremaine, LLPOregon Supreme Court · 2011
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Johnson & Lechman-Su, P. C. v. SternbergCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Kastle v. Salem HospitalCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
- Rivas v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
- Concienne v. AsanteCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Sternberg v. Lechman-SuCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019