Hoyt v. Paulos

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting trial court’s application of ORCP 7 D(4)(a)(i) (1983), stating only that court’s interpretation would violate ORS 1.735(1) by affecting when an action is deemed commenced, thereby abridging a “plaintiff’s substantive rights to maintain [an] action”
• MVD service is personal service on defendant’s statutorily appointed agent, a method authorized by ORCP 7 D(l) and 7 D(3)(a)(i)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Mitchell v. Harris
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1993-09-29· cited 12×
• Paschall v. Crisp
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1996-01-24· cited 11×
• Campos v. Chisholm
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1991-12-11· cited 9×
• Heritage Properties v. Wells Fargo Bank
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-03-23· cited 8×
• Gish v. Youngblood
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-07-07· cited 5×
• Hall v. Walrath
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1995-02-01· cited 1×
• Roberts v. Laughlin
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-08-22

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope
  Supreme Court· 1988-04-19· cited 906×
• Harp v. Loux
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1981-11-23· cited 5×
• Hoyt v. Paulos
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1989-04-05· cited 4×

Other cases named Hoyt v. Paulos

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Hoyt v. Paulos
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1989-04-05· cited 4×