Legal Opinion

Ornduff v. Hobbs

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 19, 2015No. FE121181; A152444PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLagesen, J.

In this forcible entry and detainer (FED) proceeding, defendants appeal a judgment awarding restitution of the premises to plaintiff and a supplemental judgment awarding attorney fees to plaintiff. Defendants contend that the FED complaint should have been dismissed on the grounds that (1) plaintiffs notices of termination inadequately described the deadline for tendering unpaid rent to plaintiff; and (2) the complaint failed to substantially comply with the requirements of ORS 105.124 (governing the form of FED complaints) and failed to satisfy ORCP 18 B. Defendants also challenge the…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. State v. Illig-RennOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  2. McFarlane v. McFarlaneOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  3. City of Portland v. Carriage InnOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Employers' Fire Insurance v. Love It Ice Cream Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  5. Mulier v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Johnson Mobile Park, Inc. v. SchoffstallCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  2. Johnson Mobile Park, Inc. v. SchoffstallCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  3. McCorquodale v. Oxford House, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API