Legal Opinion

Ainsworth v. Dunham

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 31, 1963PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenecke, J.

The only question presented is whether or not a judgment should be set aside for the reason that the defendant and his attorney had no notice of the trial and were not present at the trial.

ORS 18.160 provides:

“The court may, in its discretion, and upon such terms as may be just, at any time within one year after notice thereof, relieve a party from a judgment, decree, order or other proceeding taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.”

This is an action for attorneys fees in Jackson county. A Coos county firm, from Coos Bay, represented the defendant.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bratt v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Korlann v. BeltonOregon Supreme Court · 1963

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Ball v. American Trial Lawyers Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1971
  2. Burke v. RachauOregon Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Morrell v. County of LaneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
  4. Niemela v. CollingsOregon Supreme Court · 1973
  5. In Re PorterOregon Supreme Court · 1995

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

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

Powered by the Exa API