Legal Opinion

Lorentz Bruun Company v. Execulodge Corp.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 30, 1992No. CC A8810-05495; CA A62507; SC S37762PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFadeley, J.

This case presents the issue of whether a trial court order setting aside a judgment entered ex parte based on a confession of judgment is an appealable order under ORS 19.010 or any other statute. The trial court granted defendant’s motion to set aside the judgment because of “mistake or excusable neglect” under ORCP 71 B(l). The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded with instructions that the trial court enter specific findings of fact as to what constituted the excusable neglect upon which it set aside the judgment. Lorentz Bruun Company v. Execulodge Corp., 104 Or App 488, 802 P2d 79…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. CurranOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Carter v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Hiatt v. Congoleum Industries, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Waybrant v. BernsteinOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Walther v. SAIF CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Welch v. Washington CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Mary Ebel Johnson, P.C. v. ElmoreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. Bhattacharyya v. City of TigardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  4. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. StallcupCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  5. In re the Marriage of HousleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

1 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