Обновление к петицииGov. Brown: Investigate the abuse of power & criminal forgery by David Frohnmayer, Bob Ackerman and the complicity of L.C. Government

Samuel v. Frohnmayer, 770 P.2d 914 (Or. Ct. App. 1989)/ Court of Appeal

NadiaСоединенные Штаты
25 июн. 2014 г. — https://www.courtlistener.com/orctapp/6MCU/samuel-v-frohnmayer/ Plaintiff asserts that the supplemental relief that the court may grant includes the damages that he suffered because he had to bring the action to secure indemnification of the expenses of defending the civil action. He points out that he has spent over $10,000 to recover indemnity for approximately $1,870 that he spent in defending the civil action. The supplemental relief that he requests is necessary, he argues, "in order to vindicate the rights and duties of the parties as determined and declared in the judgment itself." Those damages are, he emphasizes in his reply brief, "the direct and forseeable consequence of Defendant's breach of his statutory duty to defend and indemnify Plaintiff." (Emphasis in original.) *916 What plaintiff seeks is an award of attorney fees under another name: "damages." The state quotes Shakespeare: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet * * *."[1] It could also have quoted Gertrude Stein: "[A] rose is a rose is a rose." "Damages" that are determined by the charges that an attorney makes for services in the action in which those damages are sought are attorney fees, although fees incurred in maintaining a lawsuit may at times be damages in some other action. See, e.g., Sizemore v. Swift, 79 Or. App. 352, 358, 719 P.2d 500 (1986). The characterization of plaintiff's request for relief as fees instead of damages does not end the inquiry, however, because ORS 28.080 permits further "relief," without regard to its label, "whenever necessary or proper." The dispositive issue is whether an award of fees is "necessary or proper."
Подписать
Подписать петицию
Скопировать ссылку
WhatsApp
Facebook
Nextdoor
Эл. почта
X