 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Guerin v. Beamer9/29/1999
that the last clause "would prevent a plaintiff who suffers a partial summary judgment from taking a non-prejudicial dismissal after the court grants the motion and more than five days prior to trial." Id. at 3.
At its November 3, 1978, meeting, the Council on Court Procedures voted to adopt the first alternative. Minutes, Council on Court Procedures, November 3, 1978, p 6. The Council thus rejected a rule that would have prevented a plaintiff from filing a notice of dismissal as a matter of right when a summary judgment motion is pending. It adopted instead a rule that permitted a plaintiff to file a notice of dismissal as long as he or she did so five days before trial. The version of ORCP 54 A(1) that the council adopted was enacted, with minor modifications, by the legislature. See Or Laws 1979, ch 284, ยง 32.
The legislative history of ORCP 54 A(1) reflects a considered policy choice to permit a plaintiff to dismiss his or her action even though the defendant's summary judgment motion is pending. Given that legislative history, we hold that plaintiffs' action should have been dismissed once they filed and served a timely notice of dismissal.
Reversed and remanded.
Page 1 2 3 Oregon Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|