holding that a cross-assignment of error is proper when the purpose of the assigned error is to attack a trial court ruling that, if reversed, would support the judgment on a different ground from that relied on by the trial court
Summary of this case from Gladhart v. Oregon Vineyard Supply Company1999.
holding that a cross-assignment of error is proper when the purpose of the assigned error is to attack a trial court ruling that, if reversed, would support the judgment on a different ground from that relied on by the trial court
Summary of this case from Gladhart v. Oregon Vineyard Supply CompanyFull title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: Jan 1, 1999
The rule may limit what an agency would otherwise be able to do. "An agency which is vested with discretion…
Tiner v. PremoWe subsequently affirmed Eklof's convictions without opinion. See State v. Eklof, 154 Or.App. 448, 960 P.2d…