Legal Opinion

Drollinger v. Mallon

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 1, 2011No. CC 08127040L; CA A142452; SC S058839PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, C. J.

This is a legal malpractice action brought by plaintiff, a convicted felon, against lawyers who undertook to represent him in his attempt to obtain post-conviction relief, and then, shortly before the matter was scheduled for trial, withdrew. Defendant lawyers moved to dismiss the malpractice action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, ORCP 21 A(8). They argued that, under this court’s decision in Stevens v. Bispham, 316 Or 221, 851 P2d 556 (1993), the malpractice action was barred because plaintiff had not been exonerated of the underlying offenses. The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania v. FinleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Stevens v. BisphamOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Chocktoot v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Harding v. BellOregon Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Joshi v. Providence Health System of Oregon Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2006

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Watson v. MeltzerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. Smith v. Providence Health & Services - OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2017
  3. Woods v. HillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  4. Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC v. MurrayDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2014
  5. Moore-Reed v. GriffinOregon Supreme Court · 2025

3 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