Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Frohnmayer v. Bicar, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 21, 1993No. 16-91-00529; CA A73499PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDurham, J.

Defendants appeal from a summary judgment in this civil action and raise four assignments of error. We address only one because it is dispositive of the appeal.

Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint and included a request for oral argument in the caption of the motion. UTCR 5.050(1) provides, in part:

“There shall be oral argument if requested by the moving party in the caption of the motion or by a responding party in the caption of a response.”

The court denied the request for oral argument and denied the motion. Defendants assign error to the denial of oral argument.

The state concedes…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In re the Marriage of ColemanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  2. In re the Marriage of LockardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Zehr v. HaugenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  2. Banks v. WellsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  3. M. A. v. MouktabisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API