Slocum v. Lang
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtRiggs, J.
Defendant appeals from a judgment for plaintiff in this breach of contract action. He argues that the court erroneously interpreted his contract with plaintiff to be a contract for sale of plaintiffs law practice and not an option to purchase the practice. Plaintiff cross-appeals the court’s determination that he was not entitled to an accounting of the fees generated by the contingent fee cases that he worked on before the transfer of his practice to defendant. We reverse and remand on appeal and affirm on cross-appeal.
Plaintiff was a practicing Oregon attorney who was contemplating…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Timberline Equipment Co., Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Abercrombie v. Hayden Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Hatley v. StaffordOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Kabil Developments Corp. v. MignotOregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Mann v. WetterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Milne v. Milne Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- Criterion Interests, Inc. v. Deschutes ClubCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
- Anderson v. DivitoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
- Trevitts v. Hoffman-MarmolejoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- In re the Marriage of PattersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.