Case Name: William Stirling MAXWELL, Appellant, v. Michael R. STEBBINS and Nickolas C. Nylander, Respondents
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2002-03-13
Citations: 180 Or. App. 201
Docket Number: 99 CV 0130; A112488
Parties: William Stirling MAXWELL, Appellant, v. Michael R. STEBBINS and Nickolas C. Nylander, Respondents.
Judges: Before Landau, Presiding Judge, and Brewer and Schuman, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 180
Pages: 201–202

Head Matter:
Submitted on record and briefs February 1,
appeal dismissed March 13, 2002
William Stirling MAXWELL, Appellant, v. Michael R. STEBBINS and Nickolas C. Nylander, Respondents.
99 CV 0130; A112488
42 P3d 339
William Stirling Maxwell filed the brief pro se.
Charles D. Carlson and Brown, Roseta, Long, McConville, Kircullen & Carlson, filed the brief for respondent Michael R. Stebbins.
Joel S. DeVore and Luvaas, Cobb, Richards & Fraser, P.C., filed the brief for respondent Nickolas C. Nylander.
Before Landau, Presiding Judge, and Brewer and Schuman, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendants, which was dismissed with prejudice following motions to dismiss under ORCP 21. Plaintiff appealed the judgment dismissing the complaint. Meanwhile, plaintiff filed a motion to set aside the judgment pursuant to ORCP 71 B(1). The trial court denied the motion, and plaintiff now appeals that decision. In Maxwell v. Stebbins (A108022), 180 Or App 48, 42 P3d 336 (2002), we held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint with prejudice. That decision renders this appeal moot.
Appeal dismissed.