Legal Opinion

Wels v. Hippe

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 2017No. CC 101215E3; CA A150238; SC S063486PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.

The petition for reconsideration is allowed. The former opinion is modified and adhered to as modified.

*808LANDAU, J.

Defendants have petitioned for reconsideration of our opinion in Wels v. Hippe, 360 Or 569, 385 P3d 1028 (2016). Defendants prevailed but seek clarification of our instruction remanding the case to the trial court for further proceedings. Defendants assert that this instruction requires the trial court to vacate its original judgment in favor of plaintiff and enter judgment in favor of defendants, rather than holding a new trial and allowing plaintiff to present further evidence.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wels v. HippeOregon Supreme Court · 2017

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Albany & Eastern Railroad Co. v. Martell??Oregon Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Hisey v. PatrickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  3. Waters v. Klippel Water, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. Albany & E. R.R. Co. v. MartellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  5. Langjahr v. Glorietta Bay, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025

6 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