Schutz v. La Costita III, Inc.

Under ORS 471.565(1), social hosts’ immunity is limited to incidents arising from their actions as servers or social hosts.

The Court allowed review of this case to determine whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the circuit court’s granting of summary judgment for Defendants. Petitioner argued that the circuit court erred by granting summary judgment for Defendants when it concluded that they were entitled to statutory immunity under ORS 471.565(1). On review, Plaintiff argued that her claims were not barred by the statute, because they were claims for “negligent acts other than the services of alcoholic beverages." Plaintiff further argued that although her intoxication may have been one cause of her injuries, her injuries were also caused by Defendants’ tortious acts in their roles as her employer and supervisor, and the statute does not bar such claims. In response, Defendants argued that they were "social hosts", and as “social hosts,” they were entitled to immunity under ORS 471.565(1). Under ORS 471.565(1), social hosts’ immunity is limited to incidents arising from their actions as servers or social hosts. The Court found that, after evaluating the statutory text and construction, ORS 471.565(1) grants immunity to social hosts and servers in their capacity when voluntary intoxication was the cause of the injuries, but not for “intentional or negligent acts in other roles.” Thus, the Court held that Defendants are immune from liability for their conduct in their roles as social hosts, but they are not immune from liability for their tortious conduct, if any, in their other roles as employer or supervisor.

Affirmed on other grounds, the circuit court reversed and remanded.