Tucker and Tucker

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law:
  • Date Filed: 08-15-2018
  • Case #: A161272
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Aoyagi, J. for the Court; DeHoog, P.J.; and Egan, C.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Wife appealed supplemental judgment denying Wife her request for relief in an order to show cause. Wife assigned error to the trial court’s denial of her order “requiring Husband to pay half of his ‘deferred compensation.’” Wife argued that she is entailed to half of Husband's deferred compensation and profit interests after the business was sold according to their dissolution agreement. “In the absence of an ambiguity, the court construes the words of a contract as a matter of law." Couch Investments, LLC v. Peverieri, 359 Or 125, 132, 371 P3d 1202 (2016). The Court rejected Wife’s argument and held that the dissolution agreement was not unambiguous and the words of the document did not call for distribution of TMLLC’s profit interest units to wife. Affirmed.

Advanced Search

Back to Top