Hathaway v. B & J Property Investments, Inc.

ORS.125 does not contain a discovery rule; the one-year limitation period begins when the agreement is breached.

Plaintiffs’ petition for review of the Court of Appeals decision that ORS 12.125 does not contain a discovery rule. The plaintiffs, residents of a Salem RV Park, filed a class action against the park's owners for charging residents electricity rates higher “than the actual cost of the electricity.” ORS 12.125 has a one-year statute of limitations. The plaintiffs argue that the statute incorporates a discovery rule, arguing that the statute of limitations does not begin “until the tenant knew or reasonably should have known” of the breach. ORS.125 does not contain a discovery rule; the one-year limitation period begins when the agreement is breached. The court rejects the plaintiffs' arguments that the text “arising under” expresses a discovery rule. Plus, although ORS 12.125 is found within ORS chapter 12, where other statutes here contain a discovery rule, its placement is only an organizational decision; it does not express a discovery rule. Lastly, legislative history does not support the plaintiff's argument that the legislature intended the discovery rule to be adopted. The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.