In re the Marriage of Gibbons
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1DissentArmstrong, J.
We dismissed husband’s appeal in this case under ORS 19.245, which bars appeals from judgments entered “by confession or for want of an answer.” Gibbons and Gibbons, 153 Or App 377, 956 P2d 1069 (1998). Because I now believe that ORS 19.245 does not bar an appeal that challenges the propriety of entering a judgment for want of an answer, which is the challenge that husband makes here, I respectfully dissent from the denial of husband’s motion for reconsideration. My reading of ORS 19.245 and of earlier decisions involving similar appeals convinces me that the prohibition in ORS 19.245 is…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Schoren v. SchorenOregon Supreme Court · 1924
- Russell v. SheahanOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Denkers v. Durham Leasing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1985
- In re Marriage of HenryOregon Supreme Court · 1986
- Dennison v. DoreenOregon Supreme Court · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.