Moyer v. Columbia State Bank

In order to survive a motion to dismiss a breach of contract claim, plaintiffs must "plead ultimate facts... and not merely state legal conclusions", but are not required under ORCP 18 A to allege evidence. Fearing v. Butcher, 328 Or 367, 371, 977 P2d 1163 (1999).

Moyer appealed a limited judgment that dismissed their third amended complaint against Columbia State Bank. On appeal, Moyer assigned error to the trial court having dismissed the claim for breach of contract against Columbia State Bank. Moyer argued that the claim sufficiently pleaded ultimate facts to state a breach of contract claim against Columbia State Bank. In response, Columbia State Bank contended that (1) Moyer's breach of contract claim failed to allege an offer and acceptance communicated between the parties, (2) any consideration exchanged, or (3) any contention that Columbia State Bank caused Moyer any damages. In order to survive a motion to dismiss a breach of contract claim, plaintiffs must "plead ultimate facts... and not merely state legal conclusions", but are not required under ORCP 18 A to allege evidence. Fearing v. Butcher, 328 Or 367, 371, 977 P2d 1163 (1999). The Court held that Moyer sufficiently alleged ultimate facts to constitute a claim for breach of contract in order to survive a motion to dismiss. Limited judgment dismissing plaintiffs' sixth claim for relief against defendant Columbia State Bank reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed.