Skip to main content
· 3/8/1995

Hoke v. May Department Stores Co.

Citations

  • 891 P.2d 686
  • 133 Or. App. 410
  • 10 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 655
  • 1995 Ore. App. LEXIS 441

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that an affidavit stating that an expert would testify to the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct was adequate evidence to preclude summary judgment on a negligence claim
  • reversing summary judgment for defendant on claim that it was negligent in hiring and retaining a security guard with a history of sex- ual assault and who had assaulted the plaintiff customer
  • attorney filed general affidavit but argued on appeal that expert would testify about specific issue
  • attorney filed general affidavit but argued on appeal that expert would testify about specific issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Riggs, De Muniz Leeson, Leeson

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.