Legal Opinion

Burden v. Copco Refrigeration, Inc.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 2005No. CC 0006-06290; CA A116663; SC S51729PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKistler, J.

The primary question in this case is whether the trial court could rely on the facts recited in a certificate of service in ruling on the sufficiency of service of process. The Court of Appeals held that it could not because ORCP 21 A (2001) 1 requires a plaintiff to prove service by either affidavit or other competent evidence. Burden v. Copco Refrigeration, Inc., 192 Or App 378, 384, 86 P3d 59, modified on recons, 193 Or App 476, 89 P3d 1286 (2004). We hold that, because a certificate of service is prima facie evidence of the material facts that it recites, the trial court properly relied…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. BaroneOregon Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Illingworth v. BushongOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  3. State Ex Rel. Sweere v. CrookhamOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Ryerse v. HaddockOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Huntington v. CrouterOregon Supreme Court · 1898

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Simpkins v. ConnorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  2. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  3. CITY OF MILTON-FREEWATER v. AshleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  4. Burden v. Copco Refrigeration, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  5. Hernandez v. Jefferson County Sheriff's OfficeDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2022

2 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