§Why CasetextPricing

Andersen v. Atlantic Recording Corporation et al

Memorandum in Support [Memorandum in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Ms. Andersen's Negligence Claim].

9 Cited authorities

  1. Onita Pacific Corp. v. Trustees of Bronson

    315 Or. 149 (Or. 1992)   Cited 184 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "negligence claim for the recovery of economic losses caused by another must be predicated on some duty of the negligent actor to the injured party beyond the common law duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm"

  2. Conway v. Pacific University

    324 Or. 231 (Or. 1996)   Cited 157 times
    Holding that "the relationship between [employee] and [employer] did not rise to the level of a special relationship such that the law imposed a duty in tort" and rejecting the employee's argument that an employee handbook "created a contractual obligation on the [employer's] part to further [the employee's] interests, giving rise to a duty in tort"

  3. Oregon Steel Mills, Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand, LLP

    336 Or. 329 (Or. 2004)   Cited 109 times
    Holding that claimed damages caused by market forces during a delay caused by a defendant were unforeseeable as a matter of law

  4. Hammond v. Central Lane Communications Center

    312 Or. 17 (Or. 1991)   Cited 68 times
    Denying recovery to wife who claimed emotional injury caused by watching husband die from heart attack while 9-1-1 system negligently delayed response because she had not "point[ed] to some legally protected interest of hers that defendants violated"

  5. Lowe v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.

    207 Or. App. 532 (Or. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 29 times
    Holding that Oregon law does not permit recovery for a medical monitoring action without physical injury

  6. McCulloch v. Price Waterhouse LLP

    157 Or. App. 237 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 26 times
    Recognizing recovery of interest for negligent preparation of tax return

  7. Arista Records, L.L.C. v. Tschirhart

    241 F.R.D. 462 (W.D. Tex. 2006)   Cited 9 times

    Daniel Scott, Lisa L. Honey, Stacy R. Obenhaus, Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP, Dallas, TX, Geoffrey H. Bracken, Gardere Wynne Sewell, LLP, Houston, TX, Katheryn J. Coggon, Timothy M. Reynolds, Holme Roberts & Owen LLP, Denver, CO, for Plaintiffs. Ronald J. Shaw, The Shaw Law Firm, PC, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant. ORDER ORLANDO L. GARCIA, District Judge. Before the Court are plaintiffs' motion for terminating sanctions and for leave to file first amended complaint. Plaintiffs allege that defendant willfully

  8. DEZSOFI v. USF REDDAWAY, INC.

    Civil No. 06-6051-TC (D. Or. Jul. 6, 2007)   Cited 1 times
    In Dezsofi, the plaintiff brought FMLA and OFLA claims against his employer where his manager "refused to provide [the plaintiff] with requested paperwork to process" the plaintiff's leave.

  9. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,775 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit