Legal Opinion

Timmermann v. Herman

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 2, 2018No. A159561PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTookey, J.

*549This residential landlord and tenant case presents an issue of statutory interpretation under the Oregon Residential Landlord Tenant Act (ORLTA)-viz., whether a tenant is entitled to possession of the leased premises in a forcible entry and detainer (FED) action when the tenant prevails on her counterclaims to the extent that no rent remains due, but does not pay rent into court under ORS 90.370(1)(b).1 We conclude that the trial court erred when it ruled that tenant *349was not entitled to possession of the leased premises under ORS 90.370(1)(b) because no rent was ordered to be paid into court…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. CloutierOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  4. State v. ThompsonOregon Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. StamperCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Gibson v. WalshCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  2. State v. GreenSupreme Court of Kansas · 2020
  3. Shepard Investment Group LLC v. OrmandyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API