Harvey v. Harvey

The majority opinion holds that the judgment of the circuit court adjudicating that the third party claimant was the owner of the property levied on by plaintiff was not “a judicial determination” and therefore not an appealable order. The majority bases its holding solely on the decision of this court in Francisco v. Stringfield, 166 Or 683, 686, 144 P2d 1026 (1941). I think Francisco was wrongly decided and should be overruled. I therefore dissent.

The legislature in 1931 amended ORS 23.320 by adding the following language:

“* * * or the adverse claimant may, at his. option, have his claim…