Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Frohnmayer v. Freeman

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 16, 1994No. 91C-10151; CA A79219 (Control); 91C-10837; CA A79220; 92C-10406; CA A79221PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRiggs, J.

Defendants, who are chiropractic practitioners, appeal from the judgments assessing civil penalties and attorney fees against them and granting the plaintiff state injunc-tive relief in this action under the Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA). ORS 646.605 etseq. Plaintiff cross-appeals from the trial court’s denial of certain investigative costs. We reverse on the appeal and affirm on the cross-appeal.

The operative allegations of plaintiff’s second amended complaint are:

“4.
“Defendants provide chiropractic care to patients. As part of chiropractic care, defendants regularly use a device…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Falk v. AmsberryOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Denson v. Ron Tonkin Gran Turismo, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Hendgen v. Forest Grove Community HospitalCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  4. Investigators, Inc. v. HarveyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  5. Hinds v. Paul's Auto Werkstatt, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1991

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State ex rel. Kulongoski v. CunningCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API