Franke v. Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, “in the absence of prejudice to plaintiff arising from the delay in asserting the defense, * * * the trial court abused its discretion in denying defen- dants’ motion for leave to amend their answers”
• unless immunity defense could be established on the face of the plaintiffs complaint, it was not a proper subject of an ORCP 21 dismissal
• “Unless immunity can be determined on the face of the complaint, dismissal under ORCP 21A is not appropriate; rather, immunity must be pleaded as an affirmative defense and proved by the defendant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).