Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Overbay

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 30, 1987No. 27646; CA A37830PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNewman, J.

In our previous opinion, we stated that “[t]he dispute here concerns only the 60 acres that the addendum deleted.” 85 Or App at 578. Defendant Marilyn Overbay’s motion and petition for reconsideration assert that we should have addressed her contention that the interlocutory judgment of foreclosure is void, because the court lacked personal jurisdiction over her when it granted it. She asks for a reversal of the judgment or, alternatively, that the case be remanded to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing on whether the attorneys who purportedly represented her had authority to do…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Financial Indemnity Co. v. BevansCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  2. Louth v. WoodardOregon Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Choi v. HurleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McClure v. LebenbaumCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  2. Overbay v. LedridgeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  3. McClure v. LebenbaumCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  4. McClure v. LebenbaumCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API