Legal Opinion
Hornbuckle v. Harris
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided July 25, 1984No. A8107-04619 and A8108-05315; CA A25879PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWarden, J.
In these appeals plaintiffs seek reversal of judgments of dismissal, entered after the trial court granted defendants’ ORCP 21A motions to dismiss and plaintiffs failed to replead. The cases were consolidated in the trial court. We reverse in part and remand.
The primary question we must answer is: Did plaintiffs allege facts sufficient to state a claim for relief? We are guided by ORCP 12A, which states that “[a]ll pleadings shall be liberally construed with a view of substantial justice between the parties.” In construing these complaints, “we must assume the truth of all well-pleaded facts…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Flagg Bros., Inc. v. BrooksSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Mennonite Board of Missions v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Texaco, Inc. v. ShortSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Graffam v. BurgessSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Drake v. Mutual of Enumclaw InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Fessler v. QuinnCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. BauerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Fuentes v. TillettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014