Page v. Parsons

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Procedure
  • Date Filed: 04-25-2012
  • Case #: A139103
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Ortega, P.J. for the Court; Sercombe, J.; and Landau, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

A trial court is not required to provide multiple hearings on a special motion to strike under ORS 31.150, as this would be contrary to legislative intent to curtail the litigation process. A trial court may also grant a special motion to strike after a non-specific discovery request from the plaintiff.

Page appealed a general judgment dismissing all of his claims and a supplemental judgment awarding Parsons attorney fees. Parsons filed a special motion to strike under ORS 31.150 in response to Page's complaint. After a hearing on the motion, the trial court determined that Parsons had met his burden of proving that the claim falls within ORS 31.150(2), and instructed Page to request with particularity any discovery necessary to show Page's likelihood of prevailing on his claim. The trial court denied Page's discovery requests for lack of particularity and entered the general judgment. On appeal, Page argued that the trial court erred in denying his motion for discovery. The Court rejected this argument because Page failed to comply with the trial court's instruction for specificity in his discovery request. The Court denied Page's second assignment of error and held that ORS 31.150 does not support multiple hearings on the motion, as this would be contrary to the legislative intent. Finally, the Court rejected Page's argument that the trial court's award of attorney fees was in error because Parsons sufficiently alleged in his motion an entitlement to the fees. Affirmed.

Advanced Search