Firm News

Plaintiffs dismiss claims after day one of four-day binding arbitration. Plaintiffs sued the builder/seller of a single family home and his real estate agent for negligence and fraud. Plaintiffs sought over $340,000 for construction defects and mold in the home and alleged misrepresentations related to the construction of the home and the risk that the home would flood. Shareholder Chris Drotzmann defended the seller’s real estate agent against purported negligence and fraud claims. Prior to the arbitration hearing, the firm’s client offered $15,000 towards settlement of the claim, which was rejected. After the first day of a four-day binding arbitration, plaintiffs agreed to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice instead of proceeding further.

Four-day personal injury trial results in a verdict $380,000 less than plaintiff’s last demand. Plaintiff tripped and fell in a pothole on defendant’s property.  She claimed she needed two surgeries to her foot and suffered a subsequent broken ankle because of a weakened ankle condition. Plaintiff sought $45,000 in medical expenses, $18,000 in additional economic damages and $500,000 in noneconomic damages for her pain and suffering and permanent disability. Plaintiff’s last official settlement demand was $400,000, and the defense’s last official offer was $30,000. The settlement judge projected an adverse verdict of $100,000. Shareholder Chris Drotzmann, with the assistance of associate Brandon Stuber, tried the case for four days to a Multnomah County jury.  The jury found each party 50 percent at fault for the accident and awarded $18,211.30 in economic damages (the amount agreed to by the defense) and $20,000.00 in noneconomic damages, for a total award of $38,211.30. This award was reduced to $19,105.65 because of plaintiff’s comparative fault. The final verdict was $10,000 less than the defense’s last offer, $80,000 less than the settlement judge’s projected verdict range, and $380,000 less than plaintiff’s last demand.

PLF honors firm member. Shareholder Bill Davis was honored by the Oregon State Bar Professional Liability Fund, along with other PLF Defense Panel members, for his more than thirty years of service. Mr. Davis was one of the first attorneys retained by the PLF to represent its insureds when the organization was founded in 1978.

Firm members contribute to DRI publication. Shareholder Liz Lampson and associate Patrick Wylie are contributors to the newly-published Defense Research Institute publication, Construction Litigation Desk Reference, A State-By-State Compendium. Liz and Patrick authored the chapter on Washington law, featuring many categories of analysis including insurance issues, causes of action, defenses, alternative dispute resolution, and damages. The publication may be ordered through DRI's website: http://www.dri.org/open/Product.aspx?prod=2010-02CD

Defense win on basis of statute of ultimate repose. Shareholder Liz Lampson and associate Danica Hibpshman obtained a dispositive motion for summary judgment on a $2.6 million damage claim against the plaintiff owner of a commercial property and the general contractor on the basis of Oregon's statute of ultimate repose. The key issue was when the repose period began to run. Liz and Danica developed critical evidence from written discovery and thorough deposition testimony obtained for the defense. The court found the evidence compelling enough to find no question of fact to defeat the motion as argued by plaintiff.

Pleading dismissal obtained in legal malpractice lawsuit. Plaintiff alleged he was not properly served in a prior auto accident lawsuit by the firm’s attorney client. As a result, plaintiff alleged he was not aware of the suit and did not file an answer or a responsive pleading of any kind. As a result, a judgment of default was entered and pursuant to Oregon’s financial responsibility laws, plaintiff’s driver’s license was suspended for failing to satisfy the judgment. Plaintiff alleges he was unable to continue driving his taxicab once he and his employer learned of the suspension. Plaintiff brought suit against the firm’s attorney client seeking lost profits as a result of the license suspension. Jonathan Henderson and Chris Drotzmann obtained dismissal of the lawsuit by successfully arguing the defendant lawyer owed no duty to the non-privity plaintiff.

Six-week jury trial results in verdict substantially less than last settlement offers. Shareholder Chris Drotzmann obtained a verdict in a construction defect case that was substantially less than the last settlement offers. Counsel represented a mason and a window setter during a six-week jury trial in Washington County, Oregon, on a construction defect claim brought by the owners of an 11-building, 97-unit residential complex in Beaverton, Oregon. During trial, counsel sought to exclude plaintiffs’ expert’s ability to extrapolate the purported defects in the masonry work given the limited amount of testing performed. The court granted the defense motion, reducing the potential recovery from $325,000 to just over $50,000. The jury again reduced the claim during deliberation to just under $5,000, resulting in a verdict $70,000 less than the last settlement offer. Likewise, plaintiffs sought nearly a million dollars from the framing defendants, including the firm’s window setting sub-sub contractor. After deliberation, the jury returned an award of just over $20,000 against the firm’s window setting subcontract, over $100,000 less than the last offer.

Seminar on preparing and trying personal injury cases. Shareholder Heather Beasley joined a distinguished faculty at the National Business Institute’s seminar, Preparing and Trying the Personal Injury Case. The seminar was held on December 17, 2009, in Portland.

Super Lawyers Rising Stars. Shareholders Christopher Drotzmann and Nicole Rhoades were recently included in the 2009 Oregon Rising Stars Listing by Super Lawyers. Chris was distinguished for Construction Litigation and Nicole for Civil Litigation Defense. Congratulations to both!

Defense verdict: Product defect (pig feed). Shareholder Paul Xóchihua obtained a defense verdict, and won on a counterclaim, on an allegedly defective pig feed product in Yamhill County. Plaintiff alleged the pig feed contained excessive amounts of the mineral Selenium, which caused injury and death to plaintiff’s pigs and financial losses to its farming operations. Our client counterclaimed for recovery of money owed for the feed, plus interest.

Coverage win at Oregon Court of Appeals (“same or related” coverage). Shareholder Bill Earle obtained a favorable appellate court ruling in Oregon State Bar Professional Liability Fund v. Benfit, 225 Or App 409 (2009), where the court held that claims against two attorneys were “same or related claims” under the State’s Professional Liability Fund Plan, providing liability insurance protection for Oregon lawyers.

Washington Court of Appeals coverage win on environmental cleanup costs.Shareholder Bill Earle also received a favorable ruling for his client from the Washington Court of Appeals in Walla Walla College v. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co., 149 Wash App 726 (2009). The court held there was no coverage for environmental cleanup costs because damage did not take place during the policy period. Associate Jonathan Henderson participated in the oral argument before the court.

Defense verdict on personal injury case. Shareholder Chris Drotzmann obtained a defense verdict in an auto accident case in Marion County. Following a “near miss” head-on collision, plaintiff contended the defendant turned in front of him at the last moment, forcing plaintiff to run off the road.  The defendant acknowledged making a left turn motion but then stopped in his lane of travel when plaintiff, traveling at a high rate of speed, unnecessarily left his lane of travel.  The plaintiff incurred substantial medical expenses, including surgery, and contended he was disabled and no longer able to work. Plaintiff asked the jury for damages in excess of $500,000.  After a three-day trial, the jury returned a verdict finding plaintiff 51 percent at fault, resulting in a defense verdict.

Motion for summary judgment granted. Law firm and associate not in “special relationship” for tort law claims: Associate Jonathan Henderson won a motion for summary judgment against an attorney who filed claims against his former associate for failure to respond timely and for damages to the client from entry of default. The employer attorney argued the case was valid on agent-principal law. Mr. Henderson successfully obtained a dismissal of all tort based claims.