Legal Opinion

Roe v. Pierce

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1992No. CC 8707-91551; CA A51010; SC S37355PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUnis, J.

This action involves a challenge to the judicial approval of the apportionment of settlement proceeds from a medical malpractice action. The malpractice action was begun by Robert Leo Roe for personal injury. His wife, Mrs. Carolyn Roe, joined the action, asserting claims for loss of consortium. After Roe died, Mrs. Roe continued the action as personal representative of his estate and also brought a wrongful death claim. The claims were ultimately settled, and Mrs. Roe sought judicial approval of the settlement, which proposed to distribute the entire settlement proceeds to her for her “loss…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Goeddertz v. ParchenOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Cockrum v. GrahamOregon Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Meyer v. JosephOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Roe v. PierceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Doe v. American Red CrossCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  2. Holst v. PurdyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  3. Widing v. ESTATE OF WIDINGCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API