Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Cutri

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 30, 2002No. 0006-66455; A111174Published

1ConcurrenceHaselton, P. J.

I concur in the majority’s analysis and disposition, but write separately to highlight and address a recurring concern that this case exemplifies: What can appellate counsel do to satisfy the requirements of Ethyl Corp. v. Jalbert, 270 Or 651, 655, 529 P2d 368 (1974), if a trial record is materially incomplete?1

The answer lies, at least in part, in Hoffart v. Lindquist & Paget Mortg. Co., 182 Or 611, 620, 189 P2d 592 (1948):

“[A]ffidavits relative to the question of an appellant’s diligence and to the merits of the appeal should be filed with this court in support of a petition to reverse the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hoffart v. Lindquist & Paget Mortgage Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Ethyl Corporation v. JalbertOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. State v. ObaloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  4. State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. DahlCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API