Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Telephone & Data Systems, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 21, 1994No. 9005-03082; CA A74557PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.

Plaintiffs and defendant Amcell of Atlantic City (Amcell) move for reconsideration of our opinion, 130 Or App 302, 881 P2d 819 (1994), in which we held that the trial court erred in granting their motion for judgment on the pleadings on the basis of its judicial notice of a document that was supposedly appended to a pleading filed in a different proceeding in a different jurisdiction. We allow the motion, modify our opinion and adhere to it as modified.

The facts of this case are somewhat complex and will not be repeated in full. It is sufficient for our purposes simply to restate that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ecumenical Ministries v. Oregon State Lottery CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. ClowesOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Southmark Prime Plus, L.P. v. FalzoneDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1991
  4. Thompson v. Telephone & Data Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  5. Olsen v. City of CoburgCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Jones v. Emerald Pacific Homes, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  2. L. H. Morris Electric, Inc. v. Hyundai Semiconductor America, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  3. Allen v. LawrenceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  4. Wyatt v. SweitzCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  5. Adamson v. WorldCom Communications, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

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