Legal Opinion

Migis v. AutoZone, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 21, 2017No. 071113531; A150540PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant, AutoZone, Inc., petitions for reconsideration of our decision, Migis v. AutoZone, Inc., 282 Or App 774, 387 P3d 381 (2016), concerning the disposition of its appeal. Defendant argues that concepts of waiver or invited error should preclude a new trial on the off-the-clock claim penalties and compel a defense verdict on that issue as a matter of law. We allow the petition for reconsideration to state that we reject those arguments. Without further discussion, we adhere to our original decision.

Reconsideration allowed; former disposition adhered to.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Migis v. Autozone, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2016

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. John Hyland Const., Inc. v. Williamsen & Bleid, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  2. Athena v. Pelican Brewing Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  3. Dept. of Human Services v. E. M. S. M.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  4. Dept. of Human Services v. E. M. S. M.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  5. James v. PacifiCorpCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023

8 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