Berry v. Huffman

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Attorney Fees
  • Date Filed: 01-25-2012
  • Case #: A142774
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Haselton, P.J. for the Court; Armstrong, J.; & Duncan, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Attorney fees will not be authorized if the judgment awarding the fees is related to the enforcement of an original marriage dissolution judgment and not a judgment to "set aside, alter, or modify" a previous judgment.

Petitioner Huffman appealed the trial court's decision awarding Respondent Berry attorney fees as part of a supplemental judgment. In April 2007, when the parties' marriage was dissolved, they stipulated to a general judgment. When Huffman failed to make payments proscribed by the general judgment, Berry filed a motion of enforcement. A supplemental judgment was entered in 2009 granting wife’s motion and awarded her attorney fees under ORS 107.135. The Court of Appeals found ORS 107.135 inapplicable because the supplemental judgment was related to enforcement of a general judgment and not a judgment to “set aside, alter or modify” a previous judgment. The Court also held that there existed no independent fee entitlement under ORS 107.105(1)(j) because the supplemental judgment was not a “judgment of marital annulment, dissolution or separation.” Reversed.

Advanced Search