Skip to main content
· 3/30/1983

Haines v. Pellet

Citations

  • 62 Or. App. 428
  • 660 P.2d 1074
  • 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 2477

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding if a party raises “vague, general, or conclusory objections,” the court may treat them as “tantamount to a complete failure to object”
  • “The filing of vague, general, or conclusory objections does not meet the requirement of specific objections and is tantamount to a complete failure to object.”
  • “The filing of vague, general, or conclusory objections does not meet the requirement of specific objections and is tantamount to a complete failure to object.”
  • “The filing of vague, general, or conclusory objections does not meet the requirement of specific objections and is tantamount to a complete failure to object.”
  • “The filing of vague, general, or conclusory objections does not meet the requirement of specific objections and is tantamount to a complete failure to object.”
  • see also Langley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 502 F.3d 475, 483 (6th Cir. 2007

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gillette, Young

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.