Legal Opinion
Uptown Heights Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Seafirst Corp.
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided March 30, 1995No. CC 9203-02042; CA A75880; SC S41412, S41413PublishedCited by 91 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGraber, J.
This case involves a loan by a bank to a developer. The developer claims that the bank breached its duty of good faith 1 and intentionally interfered with the developer’s economic relations. The circuit court dismissed the complaint; the Court of Appeals reversed with respect to the intentional interference claims. Uptown Heights Associates v. Seafirst Corp., 127 Or App 355, 368, 873 P2d 438 (1994). We hold that the developer failed to state a claim with respect to the first through fourth claims for relief but that it stated a claim with respect to the fifth claim for relief.
FACTS AND…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Top Service Body Shop, Inc. v. Allstate InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Best v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- Georgetown Realty, Inc. v. Home InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- Straube v. LarsonOregon Supreme Court · 1979
- Pacific First Bank v. New Morgan Park Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1994
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- Conway v. Pacific UniversityOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Slover v. Oregon State Board of Clinical Social WorkersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- Sulzer Carbomedics, Inc. v. Oregon Cardio-Devices, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- Northwest Natural Gas Co. v. Chase Gardens, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1999
- Allen v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 1999
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.