Legal Opinion

Rectenwald v. Snider

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 10, 1995No. 9304-02593; CA A83440PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his action for negligence. ORCP 47. He argues that defendant’s motion should not have been granted because there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether defendant’s conduct constituted negligence. We affirm.

Defendant has the burden of showing that there are no genuine issues of material fact. Seeborg v. General Motors Corporation, 284 Or 695, 699, 588 P2d 1100 (1978). In reviewing whether that burden has been met, we consider the summary judgment record in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the nonmoving party, and draw all…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Seeborg v. General Motors CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Uihlein v. Albertson's, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Scott v. FordOregon Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Gantenbein v. Public Employes' Retirement BoardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Public Employes Retirement BoardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  2. State Ex Rel. City of Powers v. Coos County Airport DistrictCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  3. State Ex Rel. City of Powers v. Coos County Airport DistrictCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API