Hill v. Mayers
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
*631EDMONDS, J.
Plaintiff appeals1 from a judgment after the trial court granted defendants’ motion for a directed verdict under ORCP 60. We affirm.
Plaintiff was looking for a house to purchase that could be converted to a bed and breakfast business. A real estate agent referred her to defendants Mayers. She argues that she purchased Mayers’ house in reliance on a promise that remodeling the house to meet her needs could be done for less than $7,500, but that the actual cost of remodeling was $36,810. She identifies her claim as a claim “for damages under a theory of promissory estoppel.” As we…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Schafer v. Fraser Et UxOregon Supreme Court · 1956
- Bixler v. First Nat. Bank of OregonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
- Bush v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Texas v. Wildish Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1988
- City of Ashland v. HoffarthCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Staley v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Neiss v. EhlersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
- State v. HendricksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Duncan v. Office DepotDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1997
- D'ANGELO v. SchultzCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.