Widing v. Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there is no requirement that a plaintiff discover the full extent of their injuries before the statute begins running and that it is sufficient for a plaintiff to know that “some harm has been incurred and that a claim exists” (emphases in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Spirit Partners, LP v. Stoel Rives LLP
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2007-04-25· cited 18×
• Murphy v. Allstate Insurance
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-07-25· cited 15×
• Curzi v. Oregon State Lottery
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-06-14· cited 15×
• Oregon Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Inter-Regional Financial Group, Inc.
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1998-10-14· cited 10×
• Gessele v. Jack in the Box, Inc.
  D. Oregon· 2014-05-15· cited 10×
• Communication Management Services, LLC v. Qwest Corp.
  D. Oregon· 2014-12-15· cited 4×
• Nike, Inc. v. Northwestern Pacific Indemnity Co.
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2000-03-22· cited 2×
• Clark v. Gilstrap
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-05-30· cited 1×
• Bramel v. Brandt
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2003-11-13

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Gaston v. Parsons
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1994-01-06· cited 169×
• Woolston v. Wells
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1984-08-14· cited 94×
• Duyck v. Tualatin Valley Irrigation District
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1987-09-22· cited 56×
• Mathies v. Hoeck
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1978-12-19· cited 39×
• Widing v. ESTATE OF WIDING
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1997-08-20· cited 2×
• Alexander v. Peterson
  Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma· 1987-08-25· cited 2×