1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.2d
  4. 879 P.2d
  5. 879 P.2d 193 (1994)
 

GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER v. TUALATIN TIRE

C89-0099CV; CA A73536.

879 P.2d 193 (1994)

129 Or. App. 206

The GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, Appellant-Cross-Respondent, v. TUALATIN TIRE & AUTO, INC., an Oregon corporation, Respondent-Cross-Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided July 27, 1994.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gregory A. Chaimov, Portland, argued the cause for appellant-cross-respondent. With him on the briefs were Linda L. Marshall and Miller, Nash, Wiener, Hager & Carlsen.

Kim E. Hoyt, Salem, argued the cause for respondent-cross-appellant. With her on the briefs were William D. Brandt and Ferder, Ogdahl, Brandt & Casebeer, Salem, and Mark E. Griffin and Griffin & McCandlish, Portland.

Before ROSSMAN, P.J., RICHARDSON, C.J., and LEESON, J.

RICHARDSON, Chief Judge.

This case involves multiple claims between a franchisor, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear), and its franchisee, Tualatin Tire & Auto, Inc. (Tualatin Tire). Goodyear appeals and Tualatin Tire cross-appeals from a judgment awarding both parties damages. We reverse and remand on the appeal, and affirm in part and reverse in part on the cross-appeal.

Goodyear manufactures and sells tires. In August, 1986, Marvin Kiehm met...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases