HARRINGTON v. WARLICK

A8508-05299; CA A41364.

747 P.2d 407 (1987)

89 Or.App. 125

Robert E. HARRINGTON, Appellant, v. Harold F. WARLICK, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided December 30, 1987.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gary M. Bullock, Portland, argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant.

E. Andrew Jordan, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Bolliger, Hampton & Tarlow, Portland.

Before WARDEN, P.J., and VAN HOOMISSEN and YOUNG, JJ.


WARDEN, Presiding Judge.

In this action on a promissory note, there is no final judgment. Because it appears that the trial court intended to enter an appealable judgment, we grant it leave to do so. ORS 19.033(4). We write to explain why the judgment is not appealable.

In his second amended complaint, filed October 30, 1985, plaintiff asserted two claims for relief. The first was an action for the balance of approximately $125,000 then due on the promissory...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases