Legal Opinion

Parquit Corporation v. Ross

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 1975PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenecke, J.

The sole issue is whether the defendant Harvey, who represented himself in this lawsuit, is entitled to a judgment for attorney fees. ORS 20.096 would allow attorney fees under the present circumstances if the defendant had engaged the services of an attorney. The defendant Harvey was suspended from the practice of law during most of these proceedings, including trial. We do not consider that he was acting as an attorney during this period. ① The defendant Normandin is the trustee in bankruptcy of Harvey.

The trial court awarded attorney fees and plaintiff appeals.

Defendant contends he is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Musulin v. Woodtek, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Gowans v. Northwestern Pacific Indemnity Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1971
  3. O'CONNELL v. ZimmermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  4. Wynn v. SundquistOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  5. McMillan v. GoldenOregon Supreme Court · 1972

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Consumers Lobby Against Monopolies v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Swanson & Setzke, Chtd. v. HenningIdaho Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. Domingo v. AndersonOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Anderson v. WheelerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  5. Lev v. LevConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987

7 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