Ripnitz v. Jones

584 P.2d 315, 36 Or. App. 183, 1978 Ore. App. LEXIS 1828
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedSeptember 18, 1978
DocketNo. 24537, CA 11028
StatusPublished

This text of 584 P.2d 315 (Ripnitz v. Jones) 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
Ripnitz v. Jones, 584 P.2d 315, 36 Or. App. 183, 1978 Ore. App. LEXIS 1828 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

SCHWAB, C. J.

In this equity proceeding defendant appeals from a decree dismissing plaintiffs suit contending the court had no power to order dismissal "without prejudice.” At trial plaintiffs presented their case-in-chief and rested. The defendants rested without introducing any testimony and moved for a decree of dismissal on the ground that plaintiffs had failed to prove they were entitled to any relief. The court found that the motion was well taken and that it should be allowed.

The dismissal of a suit on motion of a defendant after plaintiff has rested constitutes a bar to any subsequent suit for the same cause. ORS 18.220; Kelley et ux. v. Mallory et ux., 202 Or 690, 277 P2d 767 (1954).

Reversed and remanded for entry of a decree dismissing with prejudice.

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

Related

Kelley Et Ux. v. Mallory Et Ux.
277 P.2d 767 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1954)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
584 P.2d 315, 36 Or. App. 183, 1978 Ore. App. LEXIS 1828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ripnitz-v-jones-orctapp-1978.