Legal Opinion

Badger v. Paulson Investment Co., Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 28, 1989No. 84-11-75; CA A45550PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButtler, P. J.

In its petition for review, which we treat as a petition for reconsideration, ORAP 10.10, Paulson points out correctly that we erred in stating that, in order for Paulson to assign error to the giving or failing to give jury instructions, it was necessary for it to file a cross-appeal. We agree that a cross-appeal was not necessary. Its position was that the judgment should be upheld but that, if it was not, it is entitled to a new trial because of errors in the jury instructions. Its cross-assignments of error did not seek to overturn the judgment, and no cross-appeal was necessary. Artman…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Artman v. RayOregon Supreme Court · 1972

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Badger v. Paulson Investment Co., Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Grijalva v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. McKinley v. Owyhee Project North Board of ControlCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
  4. Bray v. American Property Management Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  5. Kazlauskas v. KBBP, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

6 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