Legal Opinion

Wieck v. Hostetter

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 21, 2015No. 111213990; A155659PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLagesen, J.

This is an action for professional negligence. Plaintiffs allege that defendant, their former lawyer,1 committed malpractice through a course of dealing with plaintiffs that eventually forced them to sell off a valuable stone quarry, resulting in $2 million in damages. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that plaintiffs’ malpractice claim was barred by the statute of limitations and, alternatively, that it was barred by a settlement agreement between the parties that had included a mutual general release of all claims. On appeal, we agree with the trial…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Jones v. General Motors Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Outdoor Media Dimensions Inc. v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Bennett v. Farmers Insurance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Kabil Developments Corp. v. MignotOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Moro v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2015

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Beneficial Oregon, Inc. v. BivinsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  2. Global Executive Management Solutions, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, D. Oregon · 2017
  3. Robbins v. City of MedfordCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  4. Reed v. Ezelle Inv. Props. Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2018
  5. Wolff v. Board of Psychologist ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

16 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