Case ID: or_303/html/0452-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

On respondent on review’s petition for reconsideration filed May 12,
    petition for reconsideration granted and disposition of former opinion (303 Or 218, 735 P2d 614) amended May 27,1987
    ERICKSON AIR-CRANE COMPANY, Petitioner on Review, v. UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Respondent on Review, UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Appellant, v. SILVER GRIZZLY TIMBER COMPANY, LTD., Respondent.
    
    (TC [ AXXXX-XXXXX ]; CA A34839; SC S33021)
    736 P2d 1023
    Jonathan M. Hoffman, Joan L. Volpert and Martin, Bischoff, Templeton, Biggs & Ericsson, Portland, filed the petition for respondent on review.
    No appearance contra.
    Before Lent, Presiding Justice, and Linde, Campbell, Carson, Jones and Gillette, Justices.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Respondent on review United Technologies Corporation petitions only for reconsideration of our disposition in this case, Erickson Air-Crane Co. v. United Tech. Corp., 303 Or 281, 735 P2d 614 (1987), arguing that, rather than reversing the Court of Appeals and affirming the trial court outright, our disposition should have been a remand to the Court of Appeals for consideration of five assignments of error argued in that court by United Technologies but not considered. This argument is correct. See, e.g., Oregonian Publishing Co. v. O’Leary, 303 Or 297, 736 P2d 173 (1987).

Petition for reconsideration granted. The disposition of our former opinion is amended to read:

“The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings.”