State ex rel. Smith v. Curths
This text of 169 P.3d 1277 (State ex rel. Smith v. Curths) 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
Plaintiff-relator appeals a judgment of dismissal of his alternative writ of mandamus and a supplemental money judgment for filing fees that previously had been deferred. We reject without discussion plaintiff-relator’s argument that the court erred in dismissing the writ. Plaintiff-relator argues that the court erred in entering the supplemental judgment without making a determination that he had the ability to pay the fees. The state concedes that the trial court erred in that regard. We accept that concession. See State ex rel Baker v. Cook, 171 Or App 719, 720, 16 P3d 1184 (2000) (in mandamus action, trial court erred in requiring plaintiff-relator to pay previously deferred filing fees).
Supplemental money judgment for filing fees reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
169 P.3d 1277, 215 Or. App. 492, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 1454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-smith-v-curths-orctapp-2007.