Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

HAWORTH et al, Respondents, v. DSCHAAK, Appellant.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Plaintiffs Haworth and Farmers Insurance (Farmers) sued for damages arising from a car accident. Defendant counterclaimed against Farmers on breach of contract and negligence theories. Defendant admitted liability for the accident, and the case went to trial solely on defendant's counterclaims. The court directed a verdict for Farmers on defendant's breach of contract claim. The jury found for defendant on her negligence claim.

Defendant then filed a cost bill, which included a claim for attorney fees. Before judgment was entered, defendant moved to amend the fee allegation in her negligence counterclaim by interlineating the words "in accordance with ORS 20.080 (2)." Farmers objected. The motion was based on ORCP 23B and ORCP 12B. Defendant appeals its denial.

Initially, the only basis for attorney fees alleged in the negligence counterclaim was ORS 743.114, which is clearly inapposite.

The trial court correctly denied the motion. Dept. of Human Resources v. Strasser, 83 Or. App. 361, 364, 732 P.2d 38 (1987). Defendant urges, in essence, that we adopt the dissent in Strasser and overrule that decision. We decline to do so.

Defendant also relies on Benj. Franklin Fed. Savings Loan v. Phillips, 88 Or. App. 354, 745 P.2d 437 (1987). That case was decided under ORCP 23A, not ORCP 23B.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HAWORTH v. DSCHAAK
(Jul 13, 1988)