Miller v. Racing Commission

"Generally, equitable estoppel requires, among other things, a false representation." Day v. Advanced M&D Sales, Inc., 336 Or 511, 518-19, 86 P3d 678 (2004).

Plaintiff appealed a judgment dismissing her claims in an employment termination action.  Plaintiff assigned error to the trial court's grant of summary judgment.  On appeal, Plaintiff argued that Defendant should be equitably estopped from arguing that she sued the wrong defendant, that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied her a chance to amend elements of her claim, and that a reasonable jury could infer that the state treated her differently based on her age and sex.  In response, Defendant argued that the defenses were appropriate at every stage and the claims of sex or age discrimination were purely speculative.  "Generally, equitable estoppel requires, among other things, a false representation." Day v. Advanced M&D Sales, Inc., 336 Or 511, 518-19, 86 P3d 678 (2004).  The Court found that the trial court did not err in rejecting the equitable estoppel claim because the "motions and arguments [did] not represent that the state would be substituted for all claims that might be brought," though it noted that the trial court cut short its consideration of relevant factors when it denied leave to amend. Lastly, the Court concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support a claim of age or sex discrimination.  Reversed and remanded as to the first claim for relief, otherwise affirmed.