Cropp v. Interstate Distributor Co.
880 P.2d 464, 129 Or.App. 510, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 1210 (1994)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Oregon's Uniform Conflict of Laws-Limitations Act, the statute of limitations of the state where a tort occurred applies because the substantive law creating the rights and duties related to that tort is the law of the place of the injury.
Facts:
- Plaintiffs are self-employed truck drivers who reside in Gervais, Oregon, which is also their principal place of business.
- Defendant Rust is a resident of Nevada employed by defendant Interstate Distributor Company, a Washington corporation with its principal office in Tacoma.
- Interstate transacts most of its business in California but also maintains a fueling and maintenance facility in Wilsonville, Oregon, which Rust uses about twice a month.
- On December 18, 1990, plaintiffs were returning to Oregon from California.
- While plaintiffs' truck was parked on the side of Highway 395 near Doyle, California, it was struck by a truck operated by Rust and owned by Interstate.
Procedural Posture:
- In April 1992, plaintiffs filed a civil action against defendants Rust and Interstate Distributor Company in an Oregon trial court.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the claim was barred by California's one-year statute of limitations.
- The trial court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment.
- Plaintiffs, as the appellants, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Oregon Court of Appeals, with defendants as the appellees.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Oregon's Uniform Conflict of Laws-Limitations Act require the application of California's one-year statute of limitations to a personal injury claim filed in Oregon by Oregon residents, when the underlying accident occurred in California?
Opinions:
Majority - De Muniz, J.
Yes. The Act requires applying California's statute of limitations because the claim is substantively based on California law. The Uniform Conflict of Laws-Limitations Act (ORS 12.430) directs courts to apply the statute of limitations from the state upon whose law the claim is substantively based. Plaintiffs' negligence claims—alleging failure to keep a proper lookout, maintain control, and drive at a reasonable speed—concern the rights and duties of operating a motor vehicle on California highways. These rights are created, defined, and regulated by California's vehicle code, not Oregon's. Therefore, the claims are substantively based only on California law, and California's one-year statute of limitations applies, barring the action.
Dissenting - Rossman, P. J.
No. Oregon's statute of limitations should apply because Oregon is the only state with a substantial interest in the outcome. The majority errs by failing to conduct a proper choice-of-law analysis to determine the substantive basis of the claim. Oregon has adopted the 'most significant relationship' test, which requires an analysis of state interests. Oregon has a substantial interest because its residents are the plaintiffs, the economic consequences will be felt in Oregon, and the defendants are considered Oregon domiciliaries for this analysis. California's only connection is the fortuitous location of the accident, which is not a substantial interest. Because only Oregon has a substantial interest, its substantive law applies, and consequently, its two-year statute of limitations should govern the claim.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies a clear, location-based rule for applying statutes of limitations in Oregon tort cases under the Uniform Conflict of Laws-Limitations Act. By rejecting a complex 'interest analysis' or 'most significant relationship' test in this context, the court prioritized predictability over flexibility. This ruling establishes that for torts, the substantive law is that of the place of injury (lex loci delicti), making the choice-of-law determination for limitation periods straightforward. Future litigants in Oregon are now on notice that the statute of limitations of the state where an accident occurs will control, regardless of the parties' residences or other contacts.
