486 P.3d 763
Or.2021Background
- Plaintiff Max Zweizig sued under ORS 659A.030 (aiding and abetting retaliation) after workplace whistleblowing; he alleged emotional harms but no physical injury.
- A jury awarded $1,000,000 in noneconomic damages; the district court reduced the judgment to $500,000 under ORS 31.710(1)’s noneconomic damages cap.
- Defendant appealed; the Ninth Circuit affirmed in memorandum disposition and certified the question whether ORS 31.710(1) caps noneconomic damages on an ORS 659A.030 employment claim.
- The Oregon Supreme Court accepted certification and analyzed the statutory text, grammar, context in the 1987 tort‑reform bill (SB 323), and legislative history.
- The court concluded the cap applies where damages "arise out of" bodily injury, death, or property damage (including emotional harms that are tied to bodily injury) but does not apply to purely emotional‑injury employment claims under ORS 659A.030.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ORS 31.710(1) caps noneconomic damages for an unlawful employment practice claim under ORS 659A.030 | Zweizig: The cap applies only if noneconomic damages arise out of bodily injury; purely emotional‑injury employment claims are not capped | Rote: The statute treats "emotional injury or distress" as within "bodily injury" (or otherwise caps emotional damages generally), so the $500,000 cap applies | The cap applies only to noneconomic damages that arise out of bodily injury, death, or property damage (including emotional harms tied to bodily injury); it does not cap purely emotional‑injury claims under ORS 659A.030 |
Key Cases Cited
- PGE v. Bureau of Labor & Industries, 317 Or 606, 859 P2d 1143 (1993) (statutory interpretation methodology; text and context are starting points)
- State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160, 206 P3d 1042 (2009) (statutory interpretation and legislative intent principles)
- Philibert v. Kluser, 360 Or 698, 385 P3d 1038 (2016) (distinguishing emotional harms from bodily/physical harms)
- Vasquez v. Double Press Mfg., Inc., 364 Or 609, 437 P3d 1107 (2019) (describing ORS 31.710(1) as capping noneconomic damages in bodily injury cases)
- Greist v. Phillips, 322 Or 281, 906 P2d 789 (1995) (context on legislative purpose of tort‑reform measures)
- Building Structures, Inc. v. Young, 328 Or 100, 968 P2d 1287 (1998) (discussion of ORS 31.710(1) applying to actions seeking damages arising out of bodily injury)
- Rains v. Stayton Builders Mart, Inc., 289 Or App 672, 410 P3d 336 (2018) (discussion that some emotional‑distress claims can be treated as injury to person in certain contexts)