Skip to main content

Brown v. Gatti

Citations

  • 99 P.3d 299
  • 195 Or. App. 695
  • 32 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2505
  • 2004 Ore. App. LEXIS 1298

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that Multnomah County SLR 5.045(1), which provided that “ ’[n]o Motion for Reconsideration * * * shall be heard,’ ” was inapplicable in that case because “[t]he court had yet to consider [the] request, so there was nothing to reconsider” (emphasis in original
  • concluding that Multnomah County SLR 5.045(1), which provided that “ ’[n]o Motion for Reconsideration * * * shall be heard,’ ” was inapplicable in that case because “[t]he court had yet to consider [the] request, so there was nothing to reconsider” (emphasis in original)
  • determining post-trial statements to the press were not privileged as they were not made \in connection\ with a judicial proceeding, but noting there may be situations in which an attorney's statements to the press could qualify for absolute immunity
  • “We conclude that defendant’s post-trial statements do not have that necessary connection. Defendant made his statements to media personnel who played no participatory role in the trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Edmonds, Brewer, Schuman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.