Brokenshire v. Rivas and Rivas, Ltd.
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a strict products liability case. We allowed review to consider whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s motion for a directed verdict.
In the Court of Appeals, defendant argued, inter alia, that it had provided a service, not a product, and, therefore, that plaintiff had no claim under ORS 30.920. 1 Plaintiff responded that defendant never had argued at trial that it had provided a service rather than a product and, therefore, that the issue had not been preserved for appeal.
A majority of the Court of Appeals’ panel concluded that the issue had been…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1991
- Brokenshire v. Rivas and Rivas, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
3Cited by6 opinions
- Muresan v. Philadelphia Romanian Pentecostal ChurchCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
- Miller v. Pacific Trawlers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- Stewart v. Albertson's, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
- Two Two v. Fujitec America, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
- Wright v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.