Legal Opinion

Hilsenbeck v. Quadrant Corp.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 3, 1981No. 40-330, CA 19192PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Plaintiff appeals from the trial court’s order dismissing his action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The motion to dismiss was based on ORCP 54.B(1) 1 and was predicated on plaintiff’s failure to initiate arbitration proceedings pursuant to the trial court’s order abating the action pending arbitration. ORS 33.240. 2 We affirm.

Defendants Quadrant Corporation and W. C. Bauman Company were the parties to a contract under which Bauman was the general contractor for improvements on Quadrant’s property. Plaintiff was a subcontractor, and his lien is for labor and materials provided pursuant to the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Teufel Construction Co. v. American Arbitration Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1970
  2. Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. v. Port of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Jackson v. Penny Duquette Knits, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Association of Unit Owners of Bridgeview Condominiums v. DunningCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  2. Main Street Asset Corp. v. CunninghamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  3. Meissner v. DillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
  4. Mayer v. SalwayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  5. S. E. G. v. ParkerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API