Legal Opinion
Rennie v. Freeway Transport
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided December 30, 1982No. CA 19045, SC 28446PublishedCited by 121 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.
This case presents an issue identical to the one decided this day in Rennie v. Pozzi, 294 Or 334, 656 P2d 934 (1982). For the reasons set forth in that opinion, we also hold here that the trial court erred in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment based upon the statute of limitations. By operation of ORS 114.255, plaintiffs appointment as personal representative related back to the commencement of this action making it valid and timely.
Defendants here, however, advance a second and alternative ground for upholding the dismissal of plaintiffs action against them. They contend that…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rosado v. WymanSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Zapata Corp. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1981
- Dean v. Exotic Veneers, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1975
- Troutman v. ErlandsonOregon Supreme Court · 1979
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by121 opinions
- Ralph E. Thornton Cheryl A. Thornton v. City of St. Helens Warren Baker Brian LittleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Drews v. EBI CompaniesOregon Supreme Court · 1990
- Thomas Dodd and Doris Dodd v. Hood River County, an Oregon Municipal Corporation, and State of Oregon, Defendant-Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Reeder v. Succession of PalmerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
- Bloomfield v. WeaklandOregon Supreme Court · 2005
116 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.