Legal Opinion

Deep Photonics Corp. v. LaChapelle

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 30, 2016No. C114435CV; A154999 (Control); C114435CV; A155359, A155367PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTookey, J.

These consolidated appeals arise from the trial court’s dismissal of a third-party complaint that Joseph LaChapelle and James Field (collectively plaintiffs) filed against Wayland Brill and Brill’s law firm, Enterprise Law Group, Inc. (collectively defendants). Defendants filed a special motion to strike the third-party complaint under ORS 31.150, Oregon’s anti-SLAPP1 statute, and a separate motion to dismiss under ORCP 21 A(8). The trial court denied the special motion to strike, concluding that the claims alleged in the third-party complaint did not qualify for treatment under ORS 31.150.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Granewich v. HardingOregon Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. WalkerOregon Supreme Court · 2014

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Davoodian v. RiveraCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  2. Baldwin v. SeidaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  3. Towner v. Bernardo/Silverton HealthCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. Craft Renovations Inc. v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  5. Craft Renovations Inc. v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025

13 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