Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

McIntyre v. Feeman

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 5, 2008No. 050160162, A133079Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWollheim, J.

I dissent from the majority’s holding that mother’s objections to father’s ORCP 68 petition for attorney fees are properly before this court. Because the trial court record does not establish when, if ever, mother served her objections on father, I would not consider mother’s objections and would affirm the trial court’s judgment awarding attorney fees to father. However, I concur with the majority that mother’s request for attorney fees remains pending before the trial court and, therefore, it is not necessary to reach mother’s other assignments of error. 218 Or App at 327.

As the majority…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bruner v. Cascade Western Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  2. In re the Marriage BradachCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  3. Sedgwick Claims Management Services v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API