Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re the Marriage of Bond

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 13, 1983No. 25030; CA A25910Published

1DissentButtler, P. J.

Because the trial courts have been applying correctly the new rules of civil procedure, I would overrule Truax and Truax, 62 Or App 130, 659 P2d 983 (1983), in which we applied them incorrectly, and would not have followed Truax in Fenn and Fenn, 63 Or App 506, 664 P2d 1143 (1983). Therefore, I dissent from the reversal on the father’s appeal.

A purpose of the new rules, particularly ORCP 68, was to avoid the problems which had been encountered before adoption of the rules when a party appealed from a judgment or final order that left the award of attorney fees to a later date. In those cases,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Matter of Marriage of DeslerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
  2. In re the Marriage of TruaxCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  3. In re the Marriage of FennCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  4. Pratt v. McNally-Rathbone, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  5. Bradley v. Oregon Trail Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API