Free Newsletter
Parnell, Perry join Dunn Carney
Kelli Rogers//March 22, 2011//
Christopher L. Parnell and Jeffrey S. Perry recently joined Dunn Carney as Of Counsel.
Parnell will focus on bankruptcy and creditors’ rights. He has extensive experience representing creditors, trustees and business debtors on a wide range of bankruptcy and insolvency issues.
Perry will focus on tax and corporate law. He has 13 years of experience helping clients achieve business and tax objectives.
Related Content
News
- $431 million infrastructure project proposed in Eugene
- Portland’s Centennial Mills on the verge of demolition
- $960,000 office renovation in Portland building permits | Aug. 10, 2026
- Two projects in historic districts in Portland land use review intakes | Aug. 10, 2026
- Multnomah County commits up to $101.6M for Moda Center
- Portland code changes to take effect in November
- Los Colibris project approved for Portland’s OMSI District
- Pacific Northwest projects totaling $9.9 million in top bidders | Aug. 7, 2026
- Oregon opens infrastructure grant program
- Ex-TV host claps back at Detroit officials in blight case
- 31-unit multifamily project in Portland land use review intakes | Aug. 3, 2026
- $2.4 million office renovation in Portland building permits | Aug. 3, 2026
Commentary
- Expecting a big bang but witnessing only a whimper | Opinion
- Beware of when the debt collector comes calling | Opinion
- Assembly of a future workforce begins with an invitation | Opinion
- Beware of overlooking legal requirements for remote workers | Opinion
- Become a critical thinker and transform a workplace | Opinion
- Managing construction risks with international suppliers | Opinion
- A rally with many engines: the lesson of 2026’s first half | Opinion
- Oregon housing challenges persist despite sound and fury | Opinion
- When does an employee’s bullying become harassment? | Opinion
- Ditch disorganization 鈥� the cost of deferred decisions | Opinion
- Consider 10 common risks for healthcare construction projects | Opinion
- Clarifying the reach of a law regarding prevailing wage | Opinion
