Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

Michael MIGIS, indi v. dually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Respondent Cross-Appellant,

PER CURIAM.

Roy Pulvers, Portland, and Holland & Knight LLP for petition.

A.E. Bud Bailey, J. Dana Pinney, and Bailey, Pinney & Associates, LLC, for response.

Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and Garrett, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Defendant, AutoZone, Inc., petitions for reconsideration of our decision, Migis v. AutoZone, Inc. , 282 Or.App. 774, 387 P.3d 381 (2016), concerning the disposition of its appeal. Defendant argues that concepts of waiver or invited error should preclude a new trial on the off-the-clock claim penalties and compel a defense verdict on that issue as a matter of law. We allow the petition for reconsideration to state that we reject those arguments. Without further discussion, we adhere to our original decision.

Reconsideration allowed; former disposition adhered to.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Migis v. AutoZone, Inc.
(Jun 21, 2017)