J.A.H. v. Heikkila

ORCP 9B specifies how an appellant must serve a party when that party is represented; the appellant must serve the party's attorney.

The question presented before the Court was whether an appellant's failure to comply with ORCP 9B, which requires a party filing a notice of appeal to serve a copy of the notice on a represented party's attorney, is a jurisdictional defect. Wife filed a petition for a restraining order. Husband's attorney filed a notice of appeal and served a copy of the notice by mailing it to wife, not wife's attorney. Eight days later, the Court of Appeals sent a deficiency notice to husband stating the case caption in the notice of appeal was incorrect. A copy of this was mailed to the wife, who sent a picture to her attorney. Wife's attorney moved to dismiss because the Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction. Wife noted that husband had not served her attorney with a notice of appeal. The Court of Appeals agreed that proper notice is a prerequisite to jurisdiction. This Court affirmed that under ORCP 9B, if a party is represented, the appellant must serve the party's attorney. The order of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.