|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|Steven Allan Chase and Cathy Lynn Chase|
|Supreme Court Case 1|
|Clayton C. Patrick on behalf of Steven Allan Chase|
Howard Hudson on behalf of Cathy Lynn Chase
Statement of Issues:
|Steven Allan Chase and Cathy Lynn Chase (S061222) (A148342) (appeal from Washington County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 255 Or App 388, 296 P3d 1278 (2013)).|
Petitioner Steven Allan Chase has been granted review of a per curiam Court of Appeals decision that affirmed a trial court's entry of a supplemental judgment, which established the amount of child support arrearage owed by petitioner and contained a money award providing that interest would accrue on the entire arrearage amount, including the portion of the judgment that was for past interest accrued but unpaid.
On review, the issues are:
(1) Does ORS 82.010(2)(c) permit the entry of a supplemental judgment that allows for the accrual of interest on an amount of interest which accrued under a prior judgment, but which remains unpaid?
(2) Should certain of the decisions of the Court of Appeals that permit the entry of such judgments be overruled as improperly allowing for compound interest (interest on interest)?
(3) Should the Supreme Court also rule that "arrearage judgments" for spousal and child support should not be permitted, because such judgments lead not only to compound interest, but also to duplicative and confusing money awards in the trial court's judgment docket?
The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating: