Legal Opinion

Ramirez v. Selles

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 3, 1989No. 87-243-CV; CA A49594PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

Plaintiff attorney appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant attorneys Ganong, Crane and Bailey.1 Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in dismissing his claims of negligence and intentional interference with an economic relationship. ORCP 21A(8). We affirm.

In his negligence claim, plaintiff alleges that Crane and Bailey were negligent in representing plaintiffs former clients, thereby rendering the clients insolvent and unable to pay plaintiffs fees. However, plaintiff does not allege facts from which a factfinder could determine that defendants knew or should have known of an…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Solberg v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Sager v. McClendenOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Ron Tonkin Gran Turismo, Inc. v. Wakehouse Motors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  4. North Pacific Lumber Co. v. MooreOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Jolma v. SteinbockCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Soap Co. v. Ecolab, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1994
  2. Ramirez v. SellesOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Uptown Heights Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Seafirst Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  4. Soap Co. v. Ecolab, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1994
  5. Uptown Heights Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Seafirst Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API