J. A. H. v. Heikkila
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKistler, J.
ORCP 9 B requires a party filing a notice of appeal to serve a copy of the notice on a represented party’s attorney. The question that this case presents is whether an appellant’s failure to comply with that requirement is a jurisdictional defect. The Court of Appeals held that it is and dismissed this appeal. We allowed review to consider that issue and now affirm the Court of Appeals’ order dismissing the appeal.
Before turning to the facts of this case, it is helpful to describe briefly the governing statutes. To confer jurisdiction on the Court of Appeals, an appellant must file the notice…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon v. MowryOregon Supreme Court · 2011
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. City of Central PointOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- Gadda v. GaddaOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- McCall v. KulongoskiOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- Ann Sacks Tile & Stone, Inc. v. Department of RevenueOregon Supreme Court · 2012
3Cited by6 opinions
- Banerjee and FiorilloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
- Follansbee v. OoiCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
- Townsend and TownsendCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- Townsend and TownsendCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- Follansbee v. OoiCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.