Legal Opinion

In re Marriage of Salazar

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 5, 1995No. 82-2030-NJ-1; CA A83124PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, J.

Wife has appealed and husband has cross-appealed from a dissolution judgment. Wife has also filed a supplemental appeal from the trial court’s order requiring her to post an undertaking on appeal in the amount of $350. ORS 19.045(2). Husband now moves to dismiss wife’s principal appeal because of her failure to post the $350 undertaking. We consider the supplemental appeal and husband’s motion together, after inviting briefing on those matters, and conelude that the trial court did not err in requiring an undertaking of $350, rather than waiving the undertaking entirely. Accordingly, we…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stanwood v. Multnomah CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  2. Knapp v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Winn v. McGeehanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  2. Fleming Companies v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API