J. A. H. v. Heikkila

How courts have described this case

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

• adhering to ear- lier cases reading ORS 19.270 and ORS 19.500 together to determine service requirements for purposes of confer- ring jurisdiction
• read- ing ORS 19.270, ORS 19.500, and ORCP 9 B together to determine service requirements for purposes of conferring jurisdiction
• actual notice of the appeal by a party does not satisfy the jurisdictional requirement in ORCP 9 B that the notice of appeal be served on a represented party’s attorney
• actual notice of the appeal by a party does not satisfy the jurisdictional requirement in ORCP 9 B that the notice of appeal be served on a represented party’s attorney
• hold- ing that service of notice of appeal on a party, rather than the party’s attorney as required under ORCP 9 B when a party is represented, deprived Court of Appeals of jurisdic- tion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).