|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|Montara Owners Association v. La Noue Development, LLC|
|Supreme Court Case 2|
|David B. Wiles and Thomas M. Christ on behalf of Vasily A. Sharabarin|
Leta E. Gorman on behalf of Lanoue Development LLC
Statement of Issues:
|Montara Owners Association v. La Noue Development, LLC (S062120) (A140771) (Appeal from Multnomah County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 259 Or App 657, 317 P3d 257 (2013)).|
Third-party defendant Vasily A. Sharabarin, dba Advanced Construction, has been granted review of a Court of Appeals decision that reversed and remanded, in part, a judgment in favor of third-party plaintiff La Noue Development, LLC and against third-party defendant.
On review, the issues raised by third-party defendant Sharabarin are:
(1) What is the effect of a provision in a construction contract that requires a subcontractor to indemnify the general contractor against a claim for any injury or damage, including injury or damage caused in part by the general contractor?
(2) In a construction-defect case, which party has the burden of proof on
whether the cost of repair would result in "economic waste"?
The issues raised by third-party plaintiff La Noue Development, LLC, in its contingent request for review are:
(1) What is the proper measure of damages in a breach of contract case involving economic losses?
(2) Are attorney fees incurred in connection with defending claims of a third party recoverable if they are incurred in the same litigation as the claims brought by the first party?
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: