Legal Opinion
Vanderselt v. Pope
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided August 5, 1998No. 9605-03607; CA A97401PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRiggs, P. J.
Plaintiff brought this action against his former employer Pope & Talbot, Inc. (P&T), as well as its president, Peter Pope (Pope), asserting numerous tort and contract claims. The trial court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on all but one of plaintiffs claims. On appeal, plaintiff assigns error to the trial court’s decision to grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment on his other claims. For the following reasons, we affirm.
On a motion for summary judgment, we view the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Jones v. General Motors Corp., 325 Or 404, 939…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Jones v. General Motors Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1997
- Onita Pacific Corp. v. Trustees of BronsonOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- Conway v. Pacific UniversityOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Wallulis v. DymowskiOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Wattenburg v. United Medical Laboratories, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1974
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Oregon University System v. Oregon Public Employees UnionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Rick Franklin Corp. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- Ous v. OpeuCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Araujo v. General Electric Information ServicesDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2000
- Maier v. Pacific Heritage Homes, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.