Mattiza v. Foster

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Mattiza v. Foster

762 P.2d 1067, 93 Or. App. 619

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedOctober 26, 1988

Docket87-01-21, 356-L; CA A46889

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 762 P.2d 1067 (Mattiza v. Foster) 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.

Bluebook

Mattiza v. Foster, 762 P.2d 1067, 93 Or. App. 619 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

This is an action to impose a constructive trust on a gift made by plaintiffs ward to defendant on the ground that defendant had procured the gift by the exercise of undue influence. The trial court found for defendant and awarded attorney fees pursuant to ORS 20.105.

On the merits we affirm. We deny respondent’s motions for a penalty, ORS 19.160, and an attorney fee on appeal, ORS 20.105.

Affirmed; motions for penalty and attorney fee denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

This is an action to impose a constructive trust on a gift made by plaintiffs ward to defendant on the ground that defendant had procured the gift by the exercise of undue influence. The trial court found for defendant and awarded attorney fees pursuant to ORS 20.105.

On the merits we affirm. We deny respondent’s motions for a penalty, ORS 19.160, and an attorney fee on appeal, ORS 20.105.

Affirmed; motions for penalty and attorney fee denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

762 P.2d 1067, 93 Or. App. 619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mattiza-v-foster-orctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack