Multnomah County v. $6,381 in U. S. Currency

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Multnomah County v. $6,381 in U. S. Currency

802 P.2d 705, 104 Or. App. 654, 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 1691

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 12, 1990

DocketA8709-05715; CA A60621

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 802 P.2d 705 (Multnomah County v. $6,381 in U. S. Currency) 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

Multnomah County v. $6,381 in U. S. Currency, 802 P.2d 705, 104 Or. App. 654, 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 1691 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Appellant appeals from a default judgment entered in this forfeiture proceeding pursuant to Multnomah County Code 7.85 et seq, whereby the trial court ordered a forfeiture of property allegedly used to facilitate or engage in the crime of possession or delivery of a controlled substance. Appellant claims that he is the owner of the forfeited property. He filed a motion to set aside the judgment, an amended motion to set aside the judgment, a motion for reconsideration and an additional motion to set aside the judgment, all of which the trial court denied.

We agree with Multnomah County’s assertion that appellant does not have standing to appeal. He was not given notice of the forfeiture proceeding, and he was not named in the complaint or in the judgment. He did not seek to intervene, even though he was aware that a forfeiture proceeding was pending. Because he is not a party to the judgment, and the judgment does not adjudicate his interest in the property, he has no right to appeal from it. ORS 19.020; Dennison v. Doreen, 281 Or 89, 573 P2d 1242 (1978).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM

Appellant appeals from a default judgment entered in this forfeiture proceeding pursuant to Multnomah County Code 7.85 et seq, whereby the trial court ordered a forfeiture of property allegedly used to facilitate or engage in the crime of possession or delivery of a controlled substance. Appellant claims that he is the owner of the forfeited property. He filed a motion to set aside the judgment, an amended motion to set aside the judgment, a motion for reconsideration and an additional motion to set aside the judgment, all of which the trial court denied.

We agree with Multnomah County’s assertion that appellant does not have standing to appeal. He was not given notice of the forfeiture proceeding, and he was not named in the complaint or in the judgment. He did not seek to intervene, even though he was aware that a forfeiture proceeding was pending. Because he is not a party to the judgment, and the judgment does not adjudicate his interest in the property, he has no right to appeal from it. ORS 19.020; Dennison v. Doreen, 281 Or 89, 573 P2d 1242 (1978).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

802 P.2d 705, 104 Or. App. 654, 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 1691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/multnomah-county-v-6381-in-u-s-currency-orctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack