Legal Opinion
Reynolds v. Schrock
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided February 16, 2005No. C991357CV; A119200PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, J.
Reynolds 1 brought this action alleging contract and tort claims against defendant Schrock, who was Reynolds’s joint venturer in a real estate investment, and tort claims against Markley, 2 the lawyer who represented Schrock in a transaction involving that investment. Plaintiff and Schrock settled their claims, and Schrock was dismissed from the case. The trial court granted Markley’s motion for summary judgment as to plaintiffs claims against him. Plaintiff appeals, and we reverse.
I. BACKGROUND
Viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, who was the nonmoving party, ORCP 47 C, the facts…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Goodman v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Kurker v. HellMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Beall Transport Equipment Co. v. Southern Pacific TransportationCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
- Beall Transport Equipment Co. v. Southern Pacific TransportationCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
- Chem-Age Industries, Inc. v. GloverSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Reynolds v. SchrockOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- Padrick v. LyonsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
- Bergeron v. Aero Sales, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. JacobsonDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2012
- Stahly v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.