Village at North Pointe Condo. Assn. v. Bloedel Constr.

Under ORS 20.077 or ORAP 13.05(3) the Court cannot designate the plaintiff as the prevailing party because the plaintiff did not obtain a “substantial modification” of any judgment appealed.

Defendants sought reconsideration of previous decision, contending that Plaintiff should not have been designated as the prevailing party on appeal and contending that Plaintiff's cross-appeal should have been dismissed as moot with no prevailing party. Because Plaintiff did not obtain a “substantial modification” of any judgment appealed, the Court could not designate Plaintiff as the prevailing party under ORS 20.077 or ORAP 13.05(3). The Court erred in affirming the cross-appeal because the cross appeal should have been dismissed as moot. The Court did not reach the merits of the cross-appeal because it became moot once the Court determined to affirm the general judgment on appeal. The Court allowed reconsideration based on Defendant’s petition and adhered to the Court’s former opinion. The Court erred in the designation of the prevailing party and in the disposition of the cross-appeal. The Court designated Defendants as the prevailing party on appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal as moot with no prevailing party. Defendant was also awarded attorney fees and other costs.