Stull v. Hoke
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
Plaintiff appeals from the ORCP 21 dismissal of his claims for intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress, fraud, conversion and assumpsit. His action is now before us on remand from the Supreme Court. See Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or 72, 948 P2d 722 (1997). We had held that the action was commenced on May 31, 1994, and, thus, that all claims in the complaint were time barred under ORS 12.080 and ORS 12.110(1). Stull v. Hoke, 141 Or App 150, 917 P2d 69 (1996). The Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that the action had been commenced on April 13, 1994, and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Stull v. HokeOregon Supreme Court · 1997
- Baker v. FoyOregon Supreme Court · 1990
- Hoeck v. Schwabe, Williamson & WyattCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Boyd v. BoydCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- Edwards v. EdwardsOregon Supreme Court · 1990
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Willamette River I v. BoespflugCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
- Williams v. JettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Atchley v. Valais Ventures LLCDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2021
- Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc. v. Akana Group Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2023