lengthy analysis in Oregon

2008As we recently noted in Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River Gorge, 215 Or App 557, 571 , 171 P3d 942 (2007), the law pertaining to justiciability, in general, and mootness, in particular, is not especially clear, because of some tension between two Supreme Court decisions, Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or 345 , 97 P3d 1161 (2004), and Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 341 Or 471 , 145 P3d 139 (2006). *65 In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained — after a lengthy analysis of the history of the framing of the Oregon Constitution and the case law construing it — that such issues as standing, ripeness

2008As we recently noted in Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River Gorge, 215 Or App 557, 571 , 171 P3d 942 (2007), the law pertaining to justiciability, in general, and mootness, in particular, is not especially clear, because of some tension between two Supreme Court decisions, Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or 345 , 97 P3d 1161 (2004), and Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 341 Or 471 , 145 P3d 139 (2006). *65 In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained — after a lengthy analysis of the history of the framing of the Oregon Constitution and the case law construing it — that such issues as standing, ripeness

2025Despite properly framing that question, the major- ity undertakes a lengthy analysis suggesting that the Cite as 373 Or 621 (2025) 665 legislature actually intended for the elder abuse statute to have a more expansive meaning than the Court of Appeals gave it in Church.

2025The purpose of that discussion is unclear, because the majority ends up reiterating that the court “need not decide in this case * * * what additional conduct the legislature intended to include in the definition of ‘wrong- ful’ for purposes of ORS 124.110(1)(a), given the manner in which this case was litigated.” Id. at ___ (slip op at 43:5-8).

2014The court noted that “[Cartwright] is requesting 40% of what Mr. Owen requested in fees for his services which extended over a considerable period of time and included a lengthy hearing, an appeal and another lengthy hearing.” Shortly before petitioner appeared to argue his case before us, we issued our opinion in Brown v. MacDonald and Associates, LLC, 260 Or App 275 , 317 P3d 301 (2013).

2014The court noted that “[Cartwright] is requesting 40% of what Mr. Owen requested in fees for his services which extended over a considerable period of time and included a lengthy hearing, an appeal and another lengthy hearing.” Shortly before petitioner appeared to argue his case before us, we issued our opinion in Brown v. MacDonald and Associates, LLC, 260 Or App 275 , 317 P3d 301 (2013).

2008As we recently noted in Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River Gorge, 215 Or App 557, 571 , 171 P3d 942 (2007), the law pertaining to justiciability, in general, and mootness, in particular, is not especially clear, because of some tension between two Supreme Court decisions, Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or 345 , 97 P3d 1161 (2004), and Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 341 Or 471 , 145 P3d 139 (2006). *65 In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained — after a lengthy analysis of the history of the framing of the Oregon Constitution and the case law construing it — that such issues as standing, ripeness

2008As we recently noted in Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River Gorge, 215 Or App 557, 571 , 171 P3d 942 (2007), the law pertaining to justiciability, in general, and mootness, in particular, is not especially clear, because of some tension between two Supreme Court decisions, Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or 345 , 97 P3d 1161 (2004), and Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 341 Or 471 , 145 P3d 139 (2006). *65 In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained — after a lengthy analysis of the history of the framing of the Oregon Constitution and the case law construing it — that such issues as standing, ripeness

2008As we recently noted in Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River Gorge, 215 Or App 557, 571 , 171 P3d 942 (2007), the law pertaining to justiciability, in general, and mootness, in particular, is not especially clear, because of some tension between two Supreme Court decisions, Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or 345 , 97 P3d 1161 (2004), and Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 341 Or 471 , 145 P3d 139 (2006). *65 In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained — after a lengthy analysis of the history of the framing of the Oregon Constitution and the case law construing it — that such issues as standing, ripeness

2008As we recently noted in Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River Gorge, 215 Or App 557, 571 , 171 P3d 942 (2007), the law pertaining to justiciability, in general, and mootness, in particular, is not especially clear, because of some tension between two Supreme Court decisions, Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or 345 , 97 P3d 1161 (2004), and Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 341 Or 471 , 145 P3d 139 (2006). *65 In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained — after a lengthy analysis of the history of the framing of the Oregon Constitution and the case law construing it — that such issues as standing, ripeness

2007Following that, in Strunk v. PERB, 338 Or 145, 153 , 108 P3d 1058 (2005), the court dismissed a claim of a party because he lacked standing.

2007Following that, in Strunk v. PERB, 338 Or 145, 153 , 108 P3d 1058 (2005), the court dismissed a claim of a party because he lacked standing.

2002The Court of Appeals held that the three-year limitation period set out in ORS 30.020 applied to plaintiffs product liability claim and remanded the matter for further proceedings. 1 Kambury, 173 Or App at 375-83 . *371 This court allowed review to determine which limitation period applies to a product liability claim alleging that a defective product caused a person’s death.