Legal Opinion

Jordan v. Rask

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 25, 1984No. D8103-61694; CA A26832PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

This filiation proceeding was dismissed with prejudice at the close of petitioner’s case due to insufficient evidence of respondent’s paternity. ORCP 54B(2). Petitioner raises three assignments of error: (1) the dismissal pursuant to ORCP 54B(2) was erroneous; (2) the trial judge failed to make the findings which are required by ORCP 54B(2) when a case is dismissed with prejudice for lack of evidence; and (3) the trial judge abused her discretion by denying petitioner’s motion to reopen the case. We reverse.

This case was tried to the court in stages over a period of several months.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re the Marriage of CastroCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  2. Joseph v. CohenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  3. State Ex Rel. Farrer v. McGuireCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
  4. Moore v. GruetterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Venture Properties, Inc. v. ParkerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  2. Ranger Insurance v. Globe Seed & Feed Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  3. 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3905, 1999 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4982 Cody Campbell, a Minor by Darlene Campbell, His Guardian v. Kenneth S. Apfel, 1 Commissioner, Social Security AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  4. Campbell v. ApfelCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  5. Ranger Insurance v. Globe Seed & Feed Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API