Opinion · Orlaw Oregon

JOHN E. REINHARDT PLUMBING v. NORRIS, 78 Or. App. 243 (1986)

714 P.2d 1118

Type
Opinion
Court
Orlaw Oregon
Jurisdiction
Orlaw
Date
1986-03-12
Topic
general

JOHN E. REINHARDT PLUMBING v. NORRIS, 78 Or. App. 243 (1986) 714 P.2d 1118 JOHN E. REINHARDT PLUMBING, INC., Appellant, v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed JOHN E. REINHARDT PLUMBING v. NORRIS, 78 Or. App. 243 (1986). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

JOHN E. REINHARDT PLUMBING v. NORRIS,78 Or. App. 243(1986)
714 P.2d 1118
JOHN E. REINHARDT PLUMBING, INC.,Appellant,v. NORRIS et al, Defendants,
IWASAKI et ux,Respondents.
83-1425; CA A34236
Oregon Court of Appeals.
Argued and submitted December 30, 1985.
Affirmed March 12, 1986.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Yamhill County, Dean Bryson, Senior Judge.
Kaye D. Brand, McMinnville, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the brief was Craig, Brand Lake, McMinnville.

Arnold Lee Gray, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Stoel, Rives, Boley, Fraser Wyse, Portland.
Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Affirmed.Page 244
PER CURIAM
Plaintiff, a subcontractor, seeks to recover from defendants Iwasaki on a theory of unjust enrichment for amounts that it alleges it was not paid by the general contractor for work done on the Iwasakis' residence. Defendants moved for summary judgment (supported by an affidavit) on plaintiff's amended complaint. Plaintiff's answering affidavit did not show any material issue of fact which would support its claim of unjust enrichment, and there was no error in granting the motion.

Affirmed.Page 245