MOODHE v. BAILEY

Nos. C033142CV; A126230.

147 P.3d 352 (2006)

209 Or. App. 193

Michael MOODHE, Respondent, v. A.E. Bud BAILEY, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided November 8, 2006.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

David Schuck, Vancouver, WA, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was A.E. Bud Bailey.

John T. Bridges, Newberg, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Brown, Tarlow, Bridges & Palmer, P.C.

Before EDMONDS, Presiding Judge, and LINDER, Judge, and HUCKLEBERRY, Judge pro tempore.


EDMONDS, P.J.

Defendant appeals after a jury awarded damages to plaintiff on plaintiff's claim for breach of the parties' stock purchase agreement. On appeal, defendant assigns error to the trial court's failure to grant his motion for a directed verdict at the close of plaintiff's evidence, on the ground that the parties' agreement unambiguously provides that the payment of the obligations established by the agreement were to be made only by defendant's corporation...

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