Fontana v. Steenson

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his claims for accountings of two partnerships and his claim for breach of contract. He argues that the trial court erred in concluding that defendants Steenson and Schumann 1 made a prima facie showing of the defense of laches and that there were no genuine issues of material fact pertaining to that defense. ORCP 47. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

This case involves two successive partnerships, one consisting of plaintiff and all three defendants, Steenson, Schumann, and Ellis (Partnership A), and one formed after the dissolution of…