Legal Opinion

Stasch v. '69 Investment, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 12, 1997No. 93C11665; CA A88675PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.

This is an action for common-law fraud and statutory violations arising out of plaintiffs’ purchase of a parcel of real property. The trial court dismissed the action as a sanction for plaintiffs’ failure to appear for depositions. Defendants then moved for an award of attorney fees on the basis of a fee provision in the real estate sales agreement executed by the parties, but the trial court denied the motion on the ground that this is a tort action, and thus, the contractual fee provision is inapplicable. On appeal, plaintiffs contend that the trial court failed to make findings that are…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pamplin v. VictoriaOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Pamplin v. VictoriaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. SAIF Corp. v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  2. Klau-Med, Inc. v. Bodyworks Medical, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. Johnson v. Eugene Emergency Physicians, P.C.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API