Legal Opinion

Cusick v. Meyer

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 17, 1993No. A8601-00306; CA A70470PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, P. J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment for defendants after trial of plaintiffs’ statutory ejectment claim. This is the second time that this matter has come before us. In our first opinion, Cusick v. Meyer, 98 Or App 358, 359, 779 P2d 198 (1989), we held that the trial court had erred in granting summary judgment to plaintiffs and in awarding them attorney fees. We remanded the case for trial of plaintiffs’ ejectment claim. We now review the trial court’s decision on remand. Because a claim of ejectment is an action at law, we review to determine whether the trial court’s findings are supported…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Waterway Terminals Co. v. P. S. Lord Mechanical ContractorsOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Jensen v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Hanns v. HannsOregon Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Land Associates, Inc. v. BeckerOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Reserve Life Insurance v. HowellOregon Supreme Court · 1960

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Soliz v. JimenezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  2. Alacrity Solutions Group, LLC v. Triage RestorationDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API