Davis v. State

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Procedure
  • Date Filed: 11-26-2014
  • Case #: A150645
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Before Ortega, P.J., Duncan, J., & DeVore, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

ORS 12.220 applies to claims against the state notwithstanding the preemptive language of ORS 30.275(9), and the savings statute applies when some claims were dismissed with and without prejudice.

Plaintiff appealed the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint, applying the two-year statute of limitations in the Oregon Tort Claims Act (OTCA), and rejecting Oregon’s Saving Statute. Plaintiff was sentenced to 80 months on state and federal charges, in state and federal courts separately. The two sentences were to be served concurrently. After Plaintiff completed his federal sentence, he completed the balance of his sentence in state prison. Plaintiff’s release date was recalculated, and Plaintiff filed a petition for habeus corupus. Pursuant to a settlement agreement, Plaintiff was released 268 days after his original release date. Plaintiff filed a civil complaint in federal court alleging that Oregon Department of Corrections Employees improperly recalculated his release date when he returned to state prison, and that the state did not credit time served while awaiting sentencing. These claims were dismissed with and without prejudice, and Plaintiff then timely filed in state court. The trial court granted the State’s motion for summary judgement, arguing that Plaintiff’s claim was barred by the two-year statute of limitations in the OTCA, ORS 30.275(9). Plaintiff argued that ORS 30.275(9) did not bar his claim because ORS 12.220 is not a statute of limitations. The Court of Appeals held that because Plaintiff’s claims were timely filed in federal court and some were dismissed without prejudice, the savings statute applies, and Plaintiff’s claims are not barred. Reversed and Remanded.

Advanced Search