Uptown Heights Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Seafirst Corp.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRiggs, J.
I agree with the majority’s reasoning and conclusion that it was error for the trial court to grant the motions to dismiss the interference with contractual and business relationship claims. However, I would hold that the contractual and tortious good faith and fair dealing claims were improperly dismissed, and I dissent from the part of the majority opinion that affirms those rulings.
For its conclusion that the duty of good faith and fair dealing does not apply to a lender’s right to invoke a contractual default remedy, the majority opinion relies on two opinions which expressly declined to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sheets v. KnightOregon Supreme Court · 1989
- Best v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- State Ex Rel. Roberts v. Public Finance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Farrimond v. Louisiana-Pacific Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
- Johnson v. School District No. 12Oregon Supreme Court · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.