Legal Opinion

Howell v. Oregonian Publishing Co.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 22, 1987No. A8205-03304, A8207-04628 CA A37355 (Control), CA A37356PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarden, P. J.

Defendants petition for reconsideration of our decision in Howell v. Oregonian Publishing Co., 82 Or App 241, 728 P2d 106 (1986). ORAP 10.10. We allow reconsideration, and modify and clarify our previous decision.

We reversed a summary judgment that was entered in favor of defendants on plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims. We based that decision on the theory that “written contracts may be modified by subsequent oral agreements.” 82 Or App at 246. Citing Meskimen v. Larry Angell Salvage Company, 286 Or 87, 94, 592 P2d 1014 (1979), defendants contend that, because plaintiffs neither raised…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Meskimen v. Larry Angell Salvage Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Hoff v. Peninsula Drainage District No. 2Oregon Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Howell v. Oregonian Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  4. Share v. WILLIAMS ET UXOregon Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Kight v. Orchard-HaysOregon Supreme Court · 1929

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Siegner v. Interstate Production Credit Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  3. Touche Ross Ltd. v. FilipekHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. State Ex Rel. Cipriano v. Triad Mechanical, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. Airs International, Inc. v. Perfect Scents Distributions, Ltd.District Court, N.D. California · 1995

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API