Redfield v. Mead, Johnson & Company
Oregon Supreme Court
1DissentO’Connell, C. J.
The majority opinion recognizes that in our most recent eases we have held that where an action can be brought either in tort or in contract the applicable statute of limitations is to be determined on the basis of the predominant characteristic of the action. Thus in Bales for Food v. Poole, 246 Or 253, 424 P2d 892 (1967), we were called upon to decide whether an action for damages resulting from an engineer’s failure to provide for parldng facilities in designing a shopping center was governed by the two-year statute of limitations covering actions for negligent conduct, or the six-year…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Berry v. BrannerOregon Supreme Court · 1966
- Heaton v. Ford Motor Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1967
- Wights v. Staff Jennings, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1965
- Mendel v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Markle v. Mulholland's, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.