1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 385 P.3d
  5. 385 P.3d 1126 (2016)
 

DEEP PHOTONICS CORP. v. LaCHAPELLE

A154999 (Control) A155359 A155367.

385 P.3d 1126 (2016)

282 Or.App. 533

DEEP PHOTONICS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. Joseph G. LACHAPELLE, et al., Defendants. James Field and Joseph G. LaChapelle, Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Dong Kwan Kim, et al., Third-Party Defendants, and Wayland Brill and Enterprise Law Group, Inc., a California corporation, Third-Party Defendants-Appellants. Deep Photonics Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. Joseph G. LaChapelle, et al., Defendants. James Field and Joseph G. LaChapelle, Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Dong Kwan Kim, et al., Third-Party Defendants, and Wayland Brill and Enterprise Law Group, Inc., a California corporation, Third-Party Defendants-Respondents.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

November 30, 2016.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

In A154999, Peter L. Weber argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs were Timothy J. Halloran and Murphy Pearson Bradley & Feeney, California, and Jonathan Henderson, William Davis, and Davis Rothwell Earle & Xochihua, P.C.

In A154999, Jeff S. Pitzer, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Pitzer Law and Charles J. Paternoster and Parsons Farnell & Grein, LLP.

In A155359 and A155367, Jeff S. Pitzer, Portland, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs were Pitzer Law, Charles J. Paternoster and Parsons Farnell & Grein, LLP.

In A155359 and A155367, Peter L. Weber argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Timothy J. Halloran and Murphy Pearson Bradley & Feeney, California, and Jonathan Henderson, William Davis, and Davis Rothwell Earle & Xochihua, P.C.

Before Sercombe, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and DeHoog, Judge.

TOOKEY, J.

These consolidated appeals arise from the trial court's dismissal of a third-party complaint that Joseph LaChapelle and James Field (collectively plaintiffs) filed against Wayland Brill and Brill's law firm, Enterprise Law Group, Inc. (collectively defendants). Defendants filed a special motion to strike the third-party complaint under ORS 31.150, Oregon's anti-SLAPP1 statute, and a separate motion to dismiss...

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