Legal Opinion

Seely v. Hanson

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided August 26, 1993No. CC 88-2128; CA A64084; SC S39666PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarson, C. J.

This case concerns the application of sanctions, including reasonable expenses and attorney fees, to parties and lawyers in an appellate proceeding.

Plaintiff and defendants Hanson (hereinafter “defendants”) are neighbors. Their dispute over an easement granted to plaintiff by their common grantor, defendant Tuhy, ended in litigation. The trial court re-drew the property line between plaintiffs and defendants’ land and awarded plaintiff one dollar in nominal damages for defendants’ continuing trespass. Plaintiff appealed, making six assignments of error. Defendants filed a respondents’ brief…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mattiza v. FosterOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Tauscher v. AndrussOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Westfall v. Rust International & Underwriters Adjusting Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1992

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Peeples v. LampertOregon Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Patton v. Department of RevenueOregon Tax Court · 2005
  3. Fechtig v. City of AlbanyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  4. Bernard v. Gary J. Leras, P.C.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  5. Dept. of Rev. v. CroslinOregon Tax Court · 2006

7 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