Federal Deposit Insurance v. Harsch
This text of 741 P.2d 920 (Federal Deposit Insurance v. Harsch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Cross-defendant (defendant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment for cross-plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). For the reasons stated in FDIC v. Schell, 87 Or App 159, 741 P2d 916 (1987), we reject defendant’s assignments on the substantive issues and the last of his three assignments challenging the award of attorney fees to FDIC. The arguments which defendant makes in support of the other assignments relating to the attorney fees issue are so ill-defined that they are not susceptible to review.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
741 P.2d 920, 87 Or. App. 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-deposit-insurance-v-harsch-orctapp-1987.