Walker v. Oregon Travel Information Council

Under Greist v. Phillips, 322 Or 281, 295, 906 P2d 798 (1995), factual findings made by a jury do not prevent a court from making different factual findings in a separate matter in equity.

Walker appealed a judgment rejecting her whistleblower claim made under ORS 659A.203(1). The Court of Appeals initially did not reach Walker’s assignment of error, instead reversing on Oregon Travel Information Council’s cross-appeal challenging the sufficiency of the evidence on Walker’s wrongful discharge claim. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals decision and remanded the case for the Court of Appeals to consider Walker’s argument. Walker argued that the Oregon Constitution Article VII, section 3 precluded the trial court from making different factual findings on the whistleblower claim than those made by the jury on the wrongful discharge claim. Under Greist v. Phillips, 322 Or 281, 295, 906 P2d 798 (1995), factual findings made by a jury do not prevent a court from making different factual findings in a separate matter in equity. The Court found that Article VII, section 3 was intended to prevent courts from upsetting jury verdicts but that it does not dictate how courts may make factual findings in equity. The Court reasoned that because the remedies available under ORS 659A.203(1) were all equitable remedies, the trial court was free to make factual findings independent from the jury. Affirmed on appeal and on cross-appeal.