Deep Photonics Corp. v. LaChapelle

Under the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure and case law “the word ‘claim’ can mean the legal basis for a cause of action or the particular relief that a party seeks—or it can mean both the legal basis and the relief sought, together.” See M. K. F. v. Miramontes, 352 Or 401, 287 P3d 1045 (2012).

Shareholders of Deep Photonics Corporation (DPC) brought a derivative action against DPC Directors, and a jury found for DLC. One of the directors, Dong Kwan Kim, appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed, and Kim filed a petition to review the decision. Kim assigned error to the trial court allowing a jury to consider breach of fiduciary duty claims. On appeal, Kim argued that the “plaintiffs’ shareholder derivative claim is an equitable claim” and should not have been submitted to the jury. DPC contended that M. K. F. v. Miramontes, 352 Or 401, 287 P3d 1045 (2012) established that a “shareholder derivative claim for money damages resulting from…breach of fiduciary comes well within the scope of the jury trial right.” Under the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure and case law “the word ‘claim’ can mean the legal basis for a cause of action or the particular relief that a party seeks—or it can mean both the legal basis and the relief sought, together.” See M. K. F. v. Miramontes, 352 Or 401, 287 P3d 1045 (2012). The decision of the Court of Appeals and the limited judgment of the circuit court are affirmed.