MOORE v. BALL, JANIK & NOVACK

9110-06566; CA A73705.

852 P.2d 937 (1993)

120 Or. App. 466

Howard MOORE, Appellant, v. BALL, JANIK & NOVACK (all partners individually named), Respondents.

Court of Appeals of Oregon, In Banc.

Decided May 19, 1993.

Reconsideration Denied July 21, 1993.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kevin Keaney, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was Pozzi, Wilson, Atchison, O'Leary & Conboy, Portland.

Susan E. Watts, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. With her on the brief were Garr M. King and Kennedy, King & Zimmer, Portland.


DURHAM, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment for defendants in this legal malpractice action. The basis for the trial court's ruling was that the action is barred by the two-year Statute of Limitations. ORS 12.110. However, plaintiff contends that he filed a new complaint within one year after the dismissal of a timely earlier complaint stating the same claim and, therefore, that the limitation period was extended by ORS 12.220. We reverse and remand....

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