Greenway v. Parlanti

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Property Law
  • Date Filed: 08-17-2011
  • Case #: A144508
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Nakamoto, J. for the Court; Schuman, P.J.; & Wollheim, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

ORS 90.396(1) requires an eviction notice to specify the date and time of the termination of tenancy; a notice that merely indicates that the termination date and time will occur 24 hours after service is insufficient.

Greenway (Landlord) served Parlanti (Tenant) with a 24-hour eviction notice following threats of violence by Tenant’s son. Tenant appealed from the eviction, arguing that the notice did not specify the date and time of the termination as required by statute; it merely indicated that the termination date and time would occur 24 hours after service. Landlord argued that the text of the notice was sufficient. The Court performed a statutory interpretation exercise and determined that a specific date and time was required. This was because, by using the term “specifying” in the statute to refer to both acts and omissions, the legislature intended the notice to name, in a precise manner, the date and time of the termination. In addition, because service was permitted in various ways, such as by mail, it would be impractical to force a tenant to guess. Reversed.

Advanced Search