Legal Opinion

Kusyk v. Water Resources Department

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 5, 2000No. CCV-96-1-443; CA A100946PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWollheim, J.

The Water Resources Department (department) appeals a judgment awarding attorney fees to petitioners under ORS 183.497. Petitioners requested review of the department’s order in other than a contested case. The trial court granted petitioners’ motion for summary judgment and remanded the matter to the department for a contested case hearing. The department first argues that the remand was not “in favor” of petitioners and second argues that the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees to petitioners under ORS 183.497(1)(a) or ORS 183.497(1)(b). While we disagree with the department’s first…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
  2. McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Johnson v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  4. Van Gordon v. Oregon State Board of Dental ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  5. Donnell v. Eastern Oregon State CollegeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kaib's Roving R.Ph. Agency, Inc. v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  2. Kovac v. Crooked River Ranch Club & Maintenance Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  3. G.A.S.P. v. Environmental Quality CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  4. Gasp v. EqcCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  5. Kaib's Roving R.Ph. Agency, Inc. v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API