Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. v. Port of Portland

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 27, 1981No. A8005-02667, CA 18146, SC 27607Published

1Concurrence

*64DENECKE, C. J.,

specially concurring.

I specially concur to state my reason for joining in the decision of the court that the order directing the parties to proceed to arbitrate is not an appealable order.

In my opinion the applicable statutes do not guide us in determining whether the order should be appealable.

The defense of the Port to the petition to compel arbitration was that the controversy was no longer subject to arbitration. If the Port is dissatisfied with the award of the arbitrator and the judgment entered according to the award, the Port may appeal. In the appeal, the Port may…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Ware v. HieberOregon Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Trepanier v. WalkerOregon Supreme Court · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API