We are asked in this case to reconsider the rule of law in Oregon that a person is immune from liability for negligent torts committed against his or her spouse. This court first announced the rule for this state as a matter of common law in Smith v. Smith,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
HEINO v. HARPER
TC A8404-02592, CA A37137, SC S33273.
759 P.2d 253 (1988)
306 Or. 347
Dorothy M. HEINO, Petitioner On Review, v. Roy L. HARPER, Defendant, Arno Heino, Respondent On Review.
Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued and Submitted January 21, 1987.
Decided August 2, 1988.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Charles S. Tauman, Portland, argued the cause on behalf of petitioner on review. With him on the petition was Bennett, Hartman, Tauman & Reynolds, Portland.
Duane Vergeer, Portland, argued the cause on behalf of respondent on review. The responses were filed by Thomas Sauberli and Vergeer, Roehr & Sweek, Portland.
Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc.
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.
