Mattiza v. Foster

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that it was interpreting the phrase “bad faith” “for the purposes of ORS 20.105(1)”
• explaining that it was interpreting the phrase “bad faith” “for the purposes of ORS 20.105(1)”
• identifying and addressing “prevailing party” language as imposing a distinct condition for recovery of fees pursuant to ORS 20.105
• looking to the “primary aim” of the litigants to determine if they acted in bad faith
• construing statute as to matters that are generally not germane to issues here
• discussing an earlier version of ORS 20.105(1) that referred to “meritless” claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).