Collett v. Cascade Health Care, Inc.
603 P.2d 369, 43 Or. App. 489, 1979 Ore. App. LEXIS 3998
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided December 3, 1979·No. No. A7611-15818, CA 13125·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
The sole assignment of error concerns the giving of n instruction which the plaintiff contends was er-oneous. Assuming for the sake of argument that the istruction was not a correct statement of law, and hat error was preserved by a proper objection and ansidering the challenged instruction in the context f the instructions as a whole, we nevertheless affirm. Or Const, Amended Art VII, § 3; ORS 19.125(2).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Collett v. Cascade Health Care, Inc., 603 P.2d 369, 43 Or. App. 489, 1979 Ore. App. LEXIS 3998 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
603 P.2d 369 (Collett v. Cascade Health Care, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Utility Equipment, Inc. v. Morbark Industries, Inc.
763 P.2d 164 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1988)
Rambo v. McCulloch
752 P.2d 347 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1988)
Hudson v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
751 P.2d 800 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1988)