Margulies v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation Dist. of Oregon
3:13-cv-00475
D. Or.Sep 8, 2014Background
- Plaintiffs allege TriMet fails to pay bus/train operators for all compensable time, including overtime.
- The action involves FLSA and Oregon wage laws; some state-law claims remained after partial dismissal.
- Plaintiffs sought collective action treatment; thousands opted in, with five named plaintiffs.
- TriMet moved for partial summary judgment on 93 state-law claims under OTCA.
- OTCA requires notice to public bodies for tort claims; the court must determine if OTCA applies and if notice was timely.
- The court ultimately grants partial summary judgment for some non-timely notices and denies it for others, narrowing remaining state-law claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does OTCA apply to plaintiffs’ state-law wage claims? | Butterfield requires OTCA notice for tort claims. | OTCA applies to tort claims against TriMet as a public body. | OTCA applies; wage claims treated as torts under OTCA. |
| Should Butterfield govern whether FLSA/state wage claims are torts? | Butterfield supports that these claims are torts, not contracts. | Butterfield governs OTCA applicability to these claims. | Butterfield controls; state-law wage claims are torts for OTCA purposes. |
| Can Margulies's December 19, 2012 letter provide class notice under OTCA? | The letter identified the class and described ongoing violations. | OTCA notice must specify each claimant and details for each; class notice not sufficient. | Letter substantially complies; notice may be provided on behalf of the class. |
| Is Margulies's notice timely for him and other pre-OTCA-injury claimants? | Margulies's notice should cover all class members. | Timeliness fails for Margulies and those who ceased work before 180 days prior to notice. | Margulies and 64 pre-June 22, 2012 plaintiffs are untimely; 28 others timely. |
| What is the overall result of TriMet’s partial summary-judgment motion? | Motion granted in part and denied in part; some state-law claims barred, others remain. |
Key Cases Cited
- Butterfield v. State, 163 Or. App. 227, 987 P.2d 569 (Or. Ct. App. 1999) (OTCA notice extends to tort claims under FLSA/related wage claims; class notice allowed)
- Fullerton v. Lamm, 177 Or. 655, 163 P.2d 941 (Or. 1945) (statute-of-limitations context for wage claims; relevance to OTCA)
- Jenkins v. Portland Hous. Auth., 260 Or. App. 26, 316 P.3d 369 (Or. Ct. App. 2013) (affirms Butterfield approach; OTCA applicability to wage claims)
- Vaughn v. First Transit, Inc., 346 Or. 128, 206 P.3d 181 (Or. 2009) (OTCA framework; sovereign-immunity waiver context)
- Ryman v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 505 F.3d 993 (9th Cir. 2007) (federal court follow state intermediate decisions unless convinced otherwise)