Opinion · Court of Appeals of Oregon

Jefferis v. Marzano

67 Or. App. 527

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Date
1984-04-04
Topic
general

ROSSMAN, J. We grant Pathology Consultants’ petition for reconsideration for the limited purpose of modifying our previous opinion so that it reflects that our reversal of the trial court judgment only applies to defendant Marzano. The evidentiary error which necessitated that reversal was unrelated to Pathology Consultants, so the trial court judgment should have been affirmed as to that defendant. Elliot v. Callan, 255 Or 256, 466 P2d 600 (1970).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Jefferis v. Marzano. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
JEFFERIS v. MARZANO,67 Or. App. 527(1984)
JEFFERIS,Appellant,v. MARZANO et al,Respondents.
16-79-93226; CA A21703
Oregon Court of Appeals.
reconsideration filed February 7, 1984
Opinion on reconsideration filed January 25, 1984
Affirmed without opinion September 28, 1983
Reconsideration allowed; opinion modified April 4, 1984
Appeal from Circuit Court, Lane County.

Douglas R. Spencer, Judge.
Patrick J. Kouba, and Atherly, Butler Burgott, Eugene for respondent Pathology Consultants' petition.
Before Buttler, Presiding Judge and Warren and Rossman, Judges.

ROSSMAN, J.

Petition for reconsideration allowed; opinion modified to reflect that trial court judgment is affirmed with respect to Pathology Consultants.Page 528

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]Page 529
ROSSMAN, J.
We grant Pathology Consultants' petition for reconsideration for the limited purpose of modifying our previous opinion so that it reflects that our reversal of the trial court judgment only applies to defendant Marzano. The evidentiary error which necessitated that reversal was unrelated to Pathology Consultants, so the trial court judgment should have been affirmed as to that defendant.Elliot v. Callan,255 Or. 256,466 P.2d 600(1970). The former opinion is adhered to in all other respects.

Petition for reconsideration allowed; opinion on reconsideration modified to reflect that the trial court judgment is affirmed with respect to Pathology Consultants.Page 530