|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|Janet Eddy v. Staci Anderson|
|Supreme Court Case 3|
|Harry Ainsworth, Emily Rena-Dozier, and Edward Johnson on behalf of Staci Anderson |
Janet Eddy and Rodger Eddy proceeding on their own behalf
|MLW n/p; RCB pro tem|
Statement of Issues:
|(1) Does the obligation of good faith imposed by ORS 90.130 and defined in ORS 90.100(19) bar all recovery under the Oregon Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (ORLTA) if a tenant's claim for damages has a financial motivation?|
(2) If a tenant seeks redress for habitability violations under ORS 90.360, is the tenant's omission of a written demand for repair containing a threat of litigation, as would be required if the proceeding under ORS 90.365, evidence of bad faith?
(3) Must a party plead specific facts demonstrating bad faith to make that issue available as a defense or avoidance in an ORLTA case?
These summaries of cases are prepared for the benefit of members of the media to assist them in reporting the court's activities to the public. Parties and practitioners should not rely on the summaries, or the statement of issues to be decided in the summaries, as indicating the questions that the Supreme Court will consider. Regarding the questions that the Supreme Court may consider, see Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating:
Martha L. Walters