Soga v. Zimmerman

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Soga v. Zimmerman

786 P.2d 221, 100 Or. App. 363

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 31, 1990

Docket87-CV-213; CA A49864

StatusPublished

This text of 786 P.2d 221 (Soga v. Zimmerman) 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

Soga v. Zimmerman, 786 P.2d 221, 100 Or. App. 363 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

After our decision in this case, Soga v. Zimmerman, 99 Or App 213, 781 P2d 876 (1989), respondent has petitioned for attorney fees pursuant to ORS 20.105. He alleges: “The Defendant-Appellant, in taking the appeal, acted in bad faith or solely for oppressive reasons.” We deny the petition.

In Tyler v. Hartford Insurance Group, 307 Or 603, 771 P2d 274 (1989), the court said that, although ORS 20.105 does not expressly require us to make findings on the record, we are required to do so to facilitate review of the award of attorney fees. In order for us to meet that requirement, the party seeking fees must demonstrate a factual basis for such findings. The petition for attorney fees contains only the conclusory statement quoted above and is insufficient for a determination under ORS 20.105. Compare Cooper v. Maresh, 100 Or App 293, 786 P2d 220 (1990).

Petition denied.

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

PER CURIAM

After our decision in this case, Soga v. Zimmerman, 99 Or App 213, 781 P2d 876 (1989), respondent has petitioned for attorney fees pursuant to ORS 20.105. He alleges: “The Defendant-Appellant, in taking the appeal, acted in bad faith or solely for oppressive reasons.” We deny the petition.

In Tyler v. Hartford Insurance Group, 307 Or 603, 771 P2d 274 (1989), the court said that, although ORS 20.105 does not expressly require us to make findings on the record, we are required to do so to facilitate review of the award of attorney fees. In order for us to meet that requirement, the party seeking fees must demonstrate a factual basis for such findings. The petition for attorney fees contains only the conclusory statement quoted above and is insufficient for a determination under ORS 20.105. Compare Cooper v. Maresh, 100 Or App 293, 786 P2d 220 (1990).

Petition denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

786 P.2d 221, 100 Or. App. 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soga-v-zimmerman-orctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack