Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dotson v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 8, 1988No. 16 85 07097; CA A43518Published

1DissentVan Hoomissen, J.

I would hold that an ORCP 21A(9) motion to dismiss tests each claim in a complaint separately. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.

The rules of civil procedure allow plaintiffs to join claims against a number of parties and to assert alternative and even inconsistent claims. ORCP 24A; ORCP 16C. The majority holds that the trial court could look to plaintiffs claim against her former attorney to ascertain the facts in considering a motion to dismiss her claim against the other party. The majority’s holding penalizes plaintiff for joining claims that are not strictly factually inconsistent, but…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. O'Gara v. KaufmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  2. Industrial Underwriters, Inc. v. Jks, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  3. Lawver v. LawvorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  4. Dryden v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  5. Wagner v. Ryder Truck LinesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API