Legal Opinion

King v. Jones

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 21, 1971PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHowell, J.

Plaintiff filed an action for malpractice against defendants, partners in a law firm. The trial court granted a judgment on the pleadings in favor of defendants, and plaintiff appeals.

A motion for judgment on the pleadings is allowable only when the pleadings affirmatively show that plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendant, or when the defendant affirmatively alleges a complete defense which is admitted by the reply. Scott & Payne v. Potomac Ins. Co., 217 Or 323, 341 P2d 1083 (1959).

Plaintiff filed an original and two amended complaints. In her second amended complaint she…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Scott & Payne v. Potomac Insurance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Milton v. HareOregon Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Katzenberger v. BryanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1965
  4. Drury v. ButlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Beeck v. KapalisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
  2. George v. CatonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Espinoza v. ThomasMichigan Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Arlington Funding Services, Inc. v. GeigelSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2009
  5. Edmondson v. DressmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API