Legal Opinion

In re the Marriage of Berry

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 15, 2012No. 060261720; A146307PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtNakamoto, J.

Husband appeals a supplemental judgment awarding attorney fees to wife under ORS 107.104. He argues that the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees because ORS 107.104 and the parties’ stipulated general judgment do not authorize attorney fees. On review for legal error, we agree with husband and reverse.

The historical facts are undisputed. The parties were divorced in April 2007, pursuant to a stipulated judgment. That judgment provided that, among other things, husband would pay the mortgage, property taxes, and insurance on the marital home. The judgment also provided that “[e]ach…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Stull v. HokeOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Samuel v. FrohnmayerOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Domingo v. AndersonOregon Supreme Court · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Norris v. R & T Manufacturing, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API