Case Name: LANDON et ux, Appellants, v. LANE COUNTY et al, Respondents
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1984-02-01
Citations: 66 Or. App. 756
Docket Number: 16-80-11713; CA A27649
Parties: LANDON et ux, Appellants, v. LANE COUNTY et al, Respondents.
Judges: Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 66
Pages: 756–757

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted December 12, 1983,
appeal dismissed February 1,
reconsideration denied March 16,
petition for review denied April 3, 1984 (296 Or 712)
LANDON et ux, Appellants, v. LANE COUNTY et al, Respondents.
(16-80-11713; CA A27649)
675 P2d 516
Larry R. Roloff, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellants.
Randall Bryson, Eugene, argued the cause for respondents Lane County and Jack Thomas. With him on the brief were Calkins & Calkins and Bryson & Bryson, Eugene.
No appearance for respondent Estella Meyers.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
This is an action for fraud and negligence against Lane County and one of its employes. Plaintiffs appeal from a directed verdict on all counts of plaintiffs' complaint. We dismiss the appeal.
When this action was originally brought, plaintiffs named as defendants — in addition to Lane County and Jack Thomas — one Gerald K. Dalros and one Estella Meyers. Dalros subsequently obtained an order of summary judgment, but our review of the record discloses no final judgment as to plaintiffs' claims against him. See ORCP 67A. An order cannot take the place of a judgment or decree. See ORCP 70A; City of Portland v. Carriage Inn, 296 Or 191, 673 P2d 531 (1983). Moreover, although defendant Meyers no longer appears in the body of plaintiffs' amended complaint, there is no final judgment disposing of plaintiffs' claims against her.
Appeal dismissed.