Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Ainsworth

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 23, 2009No. CC 90DM0110; CA A130354; SC S055558Published

1Concurrence

DURHAM, J.,

specially concurring.

I concur in the result reached by the majority but not with its reasoning. As I explain below, the majority opinion contains an elaborate dictum that plays no role in deciding the issue before this court. I write separately to point out that dictum.

The trial court entered its original judgment in this proceeding on August 25, 2005. Mother filed no appeal from that judgment. On September 28, 2005, mother filed a motion for appointment of appellate counsel, which was granted on September 30, 2005. On October 12, 2005, mother filed a motion for entry of an amended…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Far West Landscaping, Inc. v. Pacific Cascade Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Tuttle v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
  3. Stevenson v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Amvesco, Inc. v. Key Title Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API