Harryman v. Fred Meyer, Inc.

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Law
  • Date Filed: 12-13-2017
  • Case #: A159913
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Egan, P.J. for the Court; Armstrong, J.; & Lagesen, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

ORS 31.180(1) provides a “complete defense in any civil action for personal injury” if the claimant was injured while “engaged in conduct that at the time would constitute . . . a Class B felony and that felonious conduct was a substantial factor contributing to the injury.”

Plaintiff, Harryman, appealed the trial court’s grant of Defendant’s, Fred Meyers, Inc., motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action. Plaintiff assigned error to trial court’s conclusion that his claim for assault was barred. On appeal, Harryman argued the altercation that resulted in a Class B felony had ended when employees of Fred Meyer restrained him, therefore, the employees should be accountable for the injuries Harryman suffered while being restrained. ORS 31.180(1) provides a “complete defense in any civil action for personal injury” if the claimant was injured while “engaged in conduct that at the time would constitute . . . a Class B felony and that felonious conduct was a substantial factor contributing to the injury.” The Court of Appeals found the record does not support a finding that the original altercation ended at the time of the injury. The Court held the claim is barred by ORS 31.180 because the injury occurred “at the time” of Harryman’s felonious conduct. Affirmed.

Advanced Search