Legal Opinion

Fox v. Collins

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 27, 2010No. 031011107; A139137PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWollheim, J.

Plaintiff appeals a limited judgment dismissing for a third time her product liability claims against defendants Genzyme Corporation and Valleylab, Inc. 1 Plaintiff, whose claims against those defendants had originally been filed in 2000 and subsequently dismissed as time barred, refiled those claims under a “revival” statute that the legislature enacted in 2003. See Or Laws 2003, ch 768, § 2, compiled as a note after ORS 30.905 (2003); Fox v. Collins, 213 Or App 451, 453, 162 P3d 998, rev den, 343 Or 223 (2007). Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting that the revival statute was…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Outdoor Media Dimensions Inc. v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State v. PrattOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Palmer v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Waddill v. Anchor Hocking, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Gladhart v. Oregon Vineyard Supply Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. GruverCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. McDowell Welding & Pipefitting, Inc. v. United States Gypsum Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API