Court Opinion

ID: 9534051
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:36:32.609488+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:23.366201
License: Public Domain

WARREN, J.,
dissenting.
Although defendant was the prevailing party on plaintiffs breach of contract claim and could have pleaded his entitlement to attorney fees under both the contract and ORS 20.096, he did not. The only basis for attorney fees that was asserted by defendant is ORS 20.105. His motion reads:
“Defendant moves the court for an order awarding him attorney fees in the above-entitled action for the reason that the dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint in this matter makes him a prevailing party, and for the further reason that plaintiff acted in bad faith, solely for oppressive reasons in filing this action and put defendant to considerable expense in defense.”
ORCP 68C(2) provides:
“A party seeking attorney fees shall assert the right to recover such fees by alleging the facts, statute, or rule which provides a basis for the award of such fees in a pleading filed by that party. * * * No attorney fees shall be awarded unless a right to recover such fee is asserted as provided in this subsection.”
See Dept. of Human Resources v. Strasser, 83 Or App 361, 732 P2d 38 (1987). Because the trial court awarded fees on a basis not pleaded, I would reverse the award.1 Because it expressly declined to decide whether plaintiff acted in bad faith or for oppressive reasons, I would remand for a finding on that question. Therefore, I dissent.

 The majority’s reliance on Horn v. Lieuallen Land and Livestock Corp., 69 Or App 285, 684 P2d 1246 (1984), is misplaced and obviously so. We did not approve an award of attorney fees there on a basis not pleaded, as the majority would do here. We only said that, when the plaintiff had pleaded for an award of attorney fees under a contract and the defendant had filed a belated request for attorney fees under that same contract, the award of fees to the defendant was not error. Here, defendant never requested attorney fees on the contract, belatedly or otherwise. The majority does not like what the legislture has done in ORCP 68C(2) and intends to disregard it.