109 Or. App. 690 820 P.2d 903

Argued and submitted July 29,

reversed and remanded with instructions November 13, 1991

Delos D. SHINN, Appellant, v. THE BUCKLEY HOUSE, INC., Respondent.

(90-90367; CA A67381)

820 P2d 903

Keith Rodman, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

No appearance for respondent.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Riggs and Edmonds, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*691PER CURIAM

The trial court awarded judgment to plaintiff on a claim for an account stated but denied his claim that interest on the account was payable from the date of accrual1 on the basis of defendant’s defense of estoppel. Plaintiff appeals and assigns error to the trial court’s failure to strike defendant’s affirmative defense under ORCP 21A(8), because it does not allege a false representation made with the intention that defendant rely on it.2 See Donahoe v. Eugene Planning Mill, 252 Or 543, 545, 450 P2d 762 (1969). We strictly construe pleadings of estoppel to determine whether the elements are alleged. See Wallace v. American Life Ins. Co. of Des Moines, Iowa, 116 Or 195, 237 P 974 (1925); see also Commercial Securities v. Hall, 140 Or 644, 15 P2d 483 (1932). Defendant’s defense fails to allege the requisite elements, and plaintiff was entitled to interest on the judgment. In the light of that conclusion, we need not address plaintiffs other assignment of error.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to enter amended judgment not inconsistent with this opinion.

Shinn v. Buckley House, Inc.
109 Or. App. 690 820 P.2d 903

Case Details

Name
Shinn v. Buckley House, Inc.
Decision Date
Nov 13, 1991
Citations

109 Or. App. 690

820 P.2d 903

Jurisdiction
Oregon

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!