JORDAN v. MVD, 98 Or. App. 511 (1989)

779 P.2d 217

JORDAN, Appellant, v. MOTOR VEHICLES DIVISION, Respondent.

88C-11647; CA A60335Oregon Court of Appeals.
Submitted on record and briefs August 1, affirmed September 13, 1989

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County.

Duane R. Ertsgaard, Judge.

Lawrence Wm. Jordan, Salem, filed the brief pro se for appellant.

Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and John T. Bagg, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed.

Page 512

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff appeals the trial court’s dismissal of this mandamus action, by which he seeks to compel the Motor Vehicles Division (MVD) to include certain information in its records concerning a particular registrant and to disclose that information to him. In Jordan v. MVD, 93 Or. App. 651, 763 P.2d 420 (1988), rev allowed 307 Or. 571 (1989), an action for disclosure that plaintiff brought under the Public Records Law, ORS 192.410 et seq, we rejected plaintiff’s quest for disclosure of the records. The substance of our decision defeats plaintiff’s present action. Moreover, the fact that the earlier proceeding could be and was brought demonstrates that plaintiff has a plain, speedy and adequate alternative remedy and is not entitled to proceed by mandamus. ORS 34.110.

Plaintiff also argues that defendant moved for and the court allowed dismissal of his petition for an alternative writ of mandamus. He claims that those actions are a “nullity,” because the alternative writ itself, rather than the petition, is the relevant pleading. Plaintiff’s representations about the record are incorrect. The judgment dismisses “a writ of mandamus” as well as the petition.

Affirmed.

Page 513