Waddill v. Anchor Hocking, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the legislature’s use of a term in one section of a statute and not in another section indicates a purposeful omission
• concluding that, because failure to state a claim is not jurisdictional, a challenge to a civil com-plcdnt on that ground must be properly raised and preserved at trial
• recognizing that the legislature’s use of a term in one section of a statute but not in another section indicates a purposeful omission
• applying the maxim of inclusio unius est exclusio alterius [the inclusion of one is the exclusion of the other] at first level of statutory construction
• party may raise lack of subject-matter jurisdiction “at any time, including for the first time on appeal”
• because defense of failure to state a claim under ORCP 21 G(3) is waivable by party’s failure to timely assert it, the appellate courts will not consider legal sufficiency of claim on appeal unless such a challenge was raised at trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).