Mattiza v. Foster

Decision Date26 October 1988
Citation93 Or.App. 619,762 P.2d 1067
PartiesPage 1067 762 P.2d 1067 93 Or.App. 619 Virginia Dare MATTIZA, as Guardian/Conservator of the Estate of Virginia Dare Sandy, a protected person, Appellant, v. Dorothy Jean FOSTER, Respondent. 8
CourtOregon Court of Appeals

Virginia Dare Mattiza, Austin, Tex., filed the briefs pro se for appellant.

H. Clifford Looney, Butler & Looney, P.C., Vale, filed the brief for respondent.

Before BUTTLER, P.J., and WARREN and ROSSMAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an action to impose a constructive trust on a gift made by plaintiff's ward to defendant on the ground that defendant had procured the gift by the exercise of undue influence. The trial court found for defendant and awarded attorney fees pursuant to ORS 20.105.

On the merits we affirm. We deny respondent's motions for a penalty, ORS 19.160, and an attorney fee on appeal, ORS 20.105.

Affirmed; motions for penalty and attorney fee denied.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Mattiza v. Foster
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • December 20, 1990
    ...of Appeals, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the trial court's judgment, including the award of attorney fees. Mattiza v. Foster, 93 Or.App. 619, 762 P.2d 1067 (1988). The Court of Appeals' opinion did not specifically address the attorney fees issue. We allowed review to address the natur......
  • Mattiza v. Foster
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • April 18, 1989
  • Green v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transp. Dist. of Oregon, TRI-COUNTY
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals
    • October 26, 1988
  • Mattiza v. Foster
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1989

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT