Legal Opinion
Mattiza v. Foster
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided December 20, 1990No. 87-01-21356-L; CA A46889; SC S35734PublishedCited by 133 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarson, J.
Upon review in this court, the issue before us is whether the trial court properly awarded defendant attorney fees, pursuant to ORS 20.105(1), 1 after finding that plaintiff had acted in bad faith in bringing and pursuing an action for undue influence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s award of attorney fees. We reverse.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In 1984, plaintiff, who resided in Texas, visited her 89-year-old aunt Virginia Dare Sandy in Ontario, Oregon. Plaintiff found her aunt unkempt and living in squalor. Concerned about these conditions, plaintiff initiated…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Deras v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1975
- Whipple v. HowserOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. LeathersOregon Supreme Court · 1975
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by133 opinions
- Peeples v. LampertOregon Supreme Court · 2008
- McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
- McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
- State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. AshleyOregon Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. PorterOregon Supreme Court · 1991
128 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.