Schutz v. La Costita III, Inc.

A “complete denial a previous right to claim under the common law by ORS 471.565(1) violated the remedy clause,” Oregon Constitution. Horton v. OHSU, 359 Or 168, 219 (2016).

Plaintiff sought review of the trial court’s grant of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff assigned err to the trial court’s that her claims did not fall within the exceptions to immunity enumerated in ORS 471.565(1). On appeal, Plaintiff takes the position that Defendant’s negligence occurred prior to serving alcohol, that is, when they permitted, planned and authorized the event at La Costita.  Plaintiff also argued that if her actions are barred by ORS 471.565(1), then the statute is in violation of Article I, section 10, of the Oregon Constitution. Defendants in turn argue that plaintiff cannot circumvent immunity under ORS 471.565(1) simply by pleading and identifying negligent conduct before the serving and voluntary consumption of alcohol. The Court of Appeals agreed with Defendants’ argument, and found that ORS 471.565(1) barred plaintiffs’ claims. The Court held ORS 471.565(1) eliminated previously recognized claims, and the Horton Court had ruled that “complete denial of a remedy violated the remedy clause,” ORS 471.565(1) violated the Oregon Constitution. ORS 471.565(1) eliminated previously recognized claims, and the Horton Court had ruled that “complete denial of a remedy violated the remedy clause,” ORS 471.565(1) violated the Oregon Constitution. The Court held that, at the time of the enactment of ORS 471.565, the state common law recognized causes of action for injuries alleged by Plaintiff against Defendants under general principles of common law negligence.  The Court thus found, that because ORS 471.565(1) eliminated previously recognized claims, and the Horton Court had ruled that “complete denial of a remedy violated the remedy clause,” ORS 471.565(1) violated the Oregon Constitution. Horton, 359 Or at 219. Reversed and Remanded.