Purcell v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtDeits, C. J.
Defendant Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation (Owens) petitions for reconsideration of our opinion. Purcell v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd., 153 Or App 415, 959 P2d 59 (1998). Owens contends that our “decision overlooks and/or misperceives certain facts” and that our conclusions and holding consequently were affected. Assuming arguendo that all of the factual assertions in Owens’ petition are correct, neither our analysis nor our holding would be altered.
We nevertheless allow reconsideration to correct certain statements in our opinion that could have unintended consequences on matters beyond this…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Armatta v. KitzhaberOregon Supreme Court · 1998
- Purcell v. Asbestos Corporation, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
3Cited by17 opinions
- Lay v. P & G Health Care, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2000
- Joshi v. Providence Health System of Oregon Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- Blikre v. ACandS, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
- Mason v. BCK Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
- State v. McMullinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.