Legal Opinion

Bob Godfrey Pontiac, Inc. v. Roloff

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1981No. 78-5902, CA 16378, SC 27430PublishedCited by 70 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*320TONGUE, J.

This is an action for damages against two attorneys alleging violations of their duties as attorneys as provided by ORS 9.460, which states that:

“An attorney shall:

íi* * * * *

“(4) Employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him, such means only as are consistent with truth, and never seek to mislead the court or jury by any artifice or false statement of law or fact; * *

A previous action had been brought by plaintiff, an automobile dealer, who had sued the purchaser of a used car for the balance of the purchase price. The purchaser, represented by these two…

2Cases cited57 opinions

  1. California v. Sierra ClubSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Brown v. Transcon LinesOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Nelson v. MillerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1980
  4. Martin v. TrevinoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1978
  5. Brody v. RubySupreme Court of Iowa · 1978

52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by70 opinions

  1. Mozzochi v. BeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  2. Marquay v. EnoSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
  3. Nearing v. WeaverOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Humphers v. First Interstate BankOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Olson v. FraaseNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988

65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API