- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Civil Procedure
- Date Filed: 07-05-2018
- Case #: A161175
- Judge(s)/Court Below: DeVore, J. for the Court; Lageson, PJ; & James, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Plaintiff appealed a judgment dismissing his liquor liability claim against defendant. Plaintiff assigned error to the trial court’s grant of defendant’s motion for summary judgment. On appeal, plaintiff argued that there were undisputed facts which would lead a jury to believe that defendant’s establishment substantially contributed to his intoxication. In response, defendant argued that plaintiff had not met the “substantial contribution” burden. “Summary judgment is appropriate if undisputed facts would compel a jury to return a verdict for the moving party.” Jones v. General Motors Corp., 325 Or 404, 414, 939 P2d 608 (1997). The Court of Appeals held that the facts would not lead a reasonable jury to return a verdict for plaintiff. Affirmed.