Alt v. City of Salem
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*82CAMPBELL, J.
The issue that we decide is whether a writing labeled “MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL (ORCP Rule 64Q” filed in a writ of review proceeding was in fact a motion for a new trial which extended the deadline for filing a notice of appeal. The Court of Appeals held that the writing in question was not a motion for a new trial and dismissed the appeal for lack of a timely notice of appeal. Alt v. City of Salem, 86 Or App 627, 740 P2d 216 (1987). The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Plaintiff was employed by the City of Salem. His employment was terminated for cause and plaintiff…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Kirkpatrick v. PeetOregon Supreme Court · 1967
- Bienz v. City of DaytonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
- Brooks v. DierkerOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Ellis v. RobertsOregon Supreme Court · 1986
- May v. Josephine Memorial Hospital, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Association of Unit Owners of Timbercrest Condominiums v. WarrenOregon Supreme Court · 2012
- Lincoln Loan Co. v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. McDonnellOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- Magar v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- United States National Bank v. HeggemeierCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.