Trial Attorney Support Matters: 

• Davis v. Progressive Universal Ins. Co., USDC Case No. 3:20-cv-00947-JR:  Successfully opposed the defendant's motion to dismiss complaint, providing additional legal analysis and proposed amendments to complaint in invasion of privacy and negligence per se action against insurer.  (Attorney, Gretchen Mandekor)
• Selby v. Brockwood, MCCC Case No. ___:  Provided legal analysis and proposed amendments to complaint in premises liability action.  (Attorney, Marcia Alvey)
• Sliger-Sparks v. Nordisk Systems, Inc., AAA Case No. 01-19-0000-5414:  Prevailed in opposing respondent's motion to compel production of documents by providing in-depth analysis and briefing on asserted crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege and claim of judicial estoppel.  (Attorney, Blair Townsend)
• Cowan v. Triple C. Farms, LLC, Crook County CC No. 18CV55736:  Briefed motions to compel several depositions and to amend the complaint in business dispute arising under a joint venture agreement; further provided extensive analysis and summaries of existing deposition transcripts and documentary discovery.  (Attorney, Michael Wise)
• Purdy v. Deere and Company, LCCC 16-08-00466 (as Of Counsel to the Corson & Johnson Law Firm).  After a three-week trial, the jury awarded the seriously and permanently injured plaintiff $12.25 million dollars.  This is the first trial team in the country to prevail against Deere in this type of product liability injury claim.  Provided full-scale litigation support covering all trial submissions and pretrial, trial, and post-judgment motions and argument (including, but not limited to, defeating summary judgment and various other dispositive pre-trial motions, obtaining legally correct jury instructions, obtaining better evidentiary rulings than in the prior trial, opposing unfavorable proposed verdict forms, defeating motion for new trial made after transcription of the entire trial had been permitted).  Defendants' appeal of the judgment currently pending.
• Fellner v. Bayer Pharma AG,  MCCC 14CV177739:  Heavy motions briefing in medical malpractice and pharmaceuticals (product liability) case.  Each successful motion involved defendants' various attempts to prevent plaintiff's amendments to pleadings, to withhold discoverable documents, to obtain a protective order against plaintiff's discovery, to quash plaintiff's ORCP 39 C(6) deposition subpoena under the so-called "peer-review privilege," and to object to plaintiff's pleading amendment to allege entitlement to punitive damages.   After next successfully defeating Bayer defendants' summary judgment motion raising, among other things, federal preemption, statute of limitations, learned intermediary doctrine, lack of causation, and sufficiency of labeling under federal law, both Bayer defendants and Kaiser defendants settled plaintiff's claims.   (Attorney, Michael L. Williams)
• Gatti v. Orthopedic & Fracture Specialists, MCCC 1401-01226:  Medical malpractice case - pleading amendments, discovery, discovery motions, and deposition support for client, Dan Gatti.
• Brown v. Palmer:  Medical malpractice case - litigation support included drafting and arguing motions in limine, jury instructions, and verdict form.  (Attorney, Tom D'Amore)
• Fritz v. Carson Oil Inc., Co., MCCC 15CV15487, and Fairchild v. Carson Oil Inc., Co., MCCC 15CV15503:  Defeated defendant's motions to disqualify counsel on the basis of purported attorney conflict and aiding and abetting breach of duty.  Cases settled favorably in each wrongful death plaintiffs' favor soon after that favorable ruling.  (Attornery, Michael Wise)
•  Willemsen v. Invacare Corp., MCCC 0902-01653:  Defeated defendants’ Rule 21 motions against claims involving strict products liability, negligence, and Unfair Trade Practices Act in wrongful death case.  (Attorney, Jeff Bowersox)

Appellate Matters: 

• Crandall v. State of Oregon, (S070647) (2024) (Constitutional challenge to Oregon Tort Claims Act's exception to sovereign immunity when an injured worker receives "any workers' compensation," arguing that the abolishment of a severely injured worker's claims in a statutorily-authorized third-party action violates the remedy clause)
  
• Groeneweg v. Jeld-Wen Inc., (Ninth Cir. Ct. App., No 23-35578) (2024) (Appeal of trial court dismissal of long haul trucker's claims against window manufacturer responsible for stacking and securing windows in a hazardous configuration which ultimately caused trucker's career-ending injuries when unloading)
  
• Logan v. Waterford Operations, LLC, (A182077) (2024) (Appeal of trial court's dismissal of estate's wrongful death claims, arguing that the trial court applied incorrect legal standards when it granted the defendant's summary judgment motion and dismissed the plaintiff's claims)
  
• Rogers v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, (A182077) (2024) (Arguing on appeal that under Oregon's UIM/UM statutes as construed in Batten v. State Farm, insurer may not assert a policy exclusion to limit the insured's UIM coverage to a single policy limit when the insured has paid separate premiums for that coverage in multiple policies issued by insurer and has suffered damages exceeding one or more policy limits combined)
  
• Stockert v. McLoughlin Place Operations, LLC  (A181669) (2024) (Response brief filed arguing that, in this wrongful death case arising from nursing home neglect of a vulnerable elder, the trial court properly denied the defendant's motion to compel arbitration on both procedural and substantive grounds)
  
• Sosa v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co., Ninth Cir CA Case No. 22-36051 Addressing whether Oregon’s UM/UIM statutes as construed in Batten permit the insurer to limit UIM coverage if set forth as a policy exclusion rather than a coverage limitation clause.
  
• Dahlton v. Kyser, 370 Or 34 (2022).  Successfully obtained the Oregon Supreme Court's order allowing plaintiff's petition for alternative writ of mandamus.  On mandamus, established with certainty that statutory beneficiaries in a wrongful death case are not "parties" subject to a defendant's request for, or trial court orders compelling production of, their privileged medical and psychotherapist records. 
• Wright v. Turner, 368 Or 207 (2021).  Successfully obtained the Supreme Court's second review of this case and a favorable decision requiring the deceased's underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier, State Farm, to pay the 2009 jury's damages award from  two UIM policy limit amounts covering the two vehicle collisions which caused the deceased's injuries.
• Chadwell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., (A173171).  Obtained favorable settlement in this first-filed appeal on whether a seriously injured insured is entitled to the combined policy limit amounts of underinsured motorist (UIM) coverages in multiple policies issued by the same insurer.  After submitting similar briefing as amicus curiae in Batten, et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 368 Or 538 (2021), the Supreme Court conclusively decided that Oregon’s UIM statutes do not permit insurers to assert policy terms limiting an insurer’s payment of benefits to a single highest policy limit amount. 
• Buero v. Amazon.com Services, Inc.,  Ninth Cir CA Case No. 20-35633 (2021).  Appeal to the Ninth Circuit to address whether the district court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's and putative class members' state law wage claims by applying federal law principles under the FLSA.  Certified questions to the Oregon Supreme Court currently pending.
• Gist v. ZoAn Management, Inc., 367 Or 257 (2020). Successfully obtained Supreme Court review and reversal of Court of Appeals' erroneous dismissal of plaintiffs' appeal in this proposed wage and hour class action. 363 Or 729 (2018).  Substantive briefing and argument in both the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court thereafter, arguing that trial erroneously compelled arbitration under unconscionable arbitration provisions in an illegal independent contractor agreement.  Gist v. ZoAn Mgmt., Inc., 305 Or App 708; aff’d, 370 Or 27 (2022).  Petition for reconsideration of Supreme Court's subsequent decision filed  with approximately 20 law firms joining as amici in support of reconsideration. 370 Or 27 (2022).
• Maza v. Waterford Operations, LLC, 300 Or App 471 (2019).  Favorable decision on interlocutory appeal in putative wage and hour class action, concluding that Oregon’s “meal period rule,” when properly construed, supports plaintiff’s meal period class claim seeking penalties for employees’ shortened meal periods.  Plaintiff class opposed the defendant's subsequent petition for review of that decision in the Oregon Supreme Court, which was denied in 366 Or 382 (2020).  Trial on remand concluded with the plaintiff successfully proving damages.
• Bellshaw v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, MCCC 15CV16877 (A167554) (2018) Defeated defendant's attempt to obtain an interlocutory appeal of the trial court's favorable summary judgment ruling in class action alleging violations of Oregon's anti-steering law.  Following entry of a final judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant appealed.  Appeal currently pending (A173722
• Cable Communications, Inc. v. Brunozzi, 138 SCt 167, 199 L Ed 2d 41 (2017).  Successfully opposed certification to the U.S. Supreme Court of Ninth Circuit decision upholding wage claim plaintiffs' favorable trial court ruling concluding that defendant had violated the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• DeWolf v. Mt. Hood Ski Bowl, 284 Or App 435 (2017), rev den, 361 Or 885 (2017) (upholding trial court's grant of new trial, but on a new finding of discovery abuse by the defendant--this is the first Oregon case to grant a new trial on the basis of prevailing party misconduct)
• Humphrey v. OHSU, 286 Or App 344 (2017) (discounted medical services offered to remedy injuries caused by dental procedure constitutes "payment" sufficient to satisfy notice requirements under the OTCA, and an "advance payment" sufficient to toll the statute of limitations)
• Phelps v. Wyeth, Inc., (9th Cir. Case Nos. 15-35058, 15-35096) (settled in 2018 after appellate briefing submitted; addressed to erroneous dismissal of claims against pharmaceuticals defendants and failure to properly interpret and apply Oregon law.)
• Kelley v. State Farm, (CA A156153) (SC S064010) (defendant's appeal of trial court award of statutory attorney fees in UIM case, challenging the trial court's finding that defendant's trial strategy no longer fell within attorney fee "safe harbor" protections  -- trial court decision ultimately reversed under  Spearman v. Progressive Classic Ins. Co., 276 Or App 114, 366 P3d 821 (2016), rev allowed, 383 P3d 846 (Or 2016), and aff'd, 361 Or 584 (2017). 
• Piazza v. State of Oregon, (CA A146757) (jury verdict and judgment in sex abuse case involving child negligently placed in harmful foster care home)
• Greer v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket No. 12-35056 (summary judgment in case arising from insurer's bad faith and breach of fire insurance contract)
• Reidl v. Stone, (CA A150402) (summary judgment against ORS 20.080 claim for statutorily-mandated attorney fees)
• Schutz v. La Costita III, Inc., (CA A148768) (rule 21 dismissal addressing constitutionality of Dram Shop statutes under Oregon’s  remedy clause and right to jury trial)
• Greenwood v. Greenwood, (CA A153110), Order of Dismissal issued March 7, 2013 (appeal of eviction in landlord-tenant matter)
• Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc., 350 Or 29 (2011) (plaintiff homeowner's construction defect negligence claim reinstated and remanded for trial)
• Strawn v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, 228 Or App 454, 209 P3d 357 (2009), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 350 Or 336, 258 P3d 1199, adh'd to on recons, 350 Or 521, 256 P3d 100, cert den, 565 U.S. 1177, 132 S Ct 1142, 181 L Ed2d 1017 (2012) (class action judgment affirmed in its entirety on appeal).  Jury awarded $1.5 million in compensatory damages and $8 million in punitive damages on plaintiffs’ fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract claims against defendant auto insurer for failing to meet its statutorily-mandated PIP obligations.
• Levasseur v. Armon, 240 Or App 250 (2010) (homeowners’ association dispute involving interpretation of CC&R’s; client's favorable ruling upheld on appeal)
• Mountain High Homeowners Ass’n v. J.L. Ward Co., 228 Or App 424 (2009) (fraudulent misrepresentation giving rise to equitable servitude by estoppel; plaintiffs’ victory upheld on appeal)

Appellate briefing submitted: 

• Lezak v. Expand Cellular, Inc., CA A128787, Sep. 27, 2007 (settlement reached during pendency of appeal in case involving claims of fraud, misappropriation of trade secrets, and attorney malpractice, alleging $6 million in damages)

Amicus briefing submitted on behalf of the Oregon Trial Lawyers Association (except where noted):

• Gollersrud v. LPMC, LLC, 371 Or 739 (2023) (merits brief submitted in mandamus proceeding, correctly arguing that emails left on former employer's server remained protected under attorney-client privilege and privilege was not waived by employee's failure to delete emails from server upon ending employment)
• Bonner v. American Golf Corp. of California, Inc., (S070183) (2023) (merits brief on certified question from the 9th Circuit, addressing whether dram shop immunity from suit remains constitutional under Supreme Court's current remedy clause jurisprudence)
• Twigg v. Admiral Ins. Co., S070191 (2023) (merits briefing on proper interpretation of an insurance contract, setting forth historic evolution of cases and current controlling law)
• Grant v. Adair Homes, Inc.  (A172426) (merits briefing submitted on behalf of OTLA and Public Justice, and facilitation of the plaintiff's answering brief in case addressing whether trial correctly denied the defendant's motion to compel arbitration under the plaintiff's employment agreement).
• Batten, et al v. State Farm Mut Automobile Ins. Co., 368 Or 538 (2021)  (merits briefing in consolidated district court cases on a certified question, arguing that Oregon's Underinsured Motorist Statutes do not permit an insurer to prohibit the "stacking" of underinsured motorist coverage policy limit amounts when the plaintiff has multiple policies issued by the same insurer and has suffered damages exceeding one or more policy limits combined.)
  
• Figueroa v. BNSF Railway  Company  361 Or 142 (2017) and Barrett v. Union Pacific Railroad Company 361 Or 115 (2017) (merits briefing in consolidated mandamus matters addressing Oregon's proper exercise of general jurisdiction over railroad defendants)
• Spearman v. Progressive Classic Ins. Co., 361 Or 584 (2017) (Supreme Court merits briefing on proper interpretation of "safe harbor" provisions of UM/UIM attorney fee statute).
• Kiryuta v. Country Preferred Ins. Co., 360 Or 1 (2016) (merits briefing on proper award of UM/UIM statutory attorney fees.
• 5 Star Inc. v. Atlantic Casualty Ins. Co., (CA A150818) (SC N005205) (Brief in support of plaintiff's petition for review on behalf of Professional Insurance Agents Western Alliance involving proper statutory interpretation of insurer - insurance provider agency relationship)
• Goodwin v. Kingsmen, 359 Or 694 (2016) (briefing on proper interpretation and application of statute of limitations in construction defect cases alleging both breach of contract and negligence claims)
• Chapman v. Mayfield, 358 Or 196 (2015) (focusing on foreseeability element of an Oregon negligence claim alleging tavern's over-service of alcohol to subsequently violent patron)
• Wright v. Turner, 354 Or 815 (2014) (proper interpretation of insurance policy under prevailing statutory scheme leaves jury trial issue regarding coverage for plaintiff's injuries in multi-strike car accident)
• Howell v. Boyle, 353 Or 359 (2013) (providing historical overview of Oregon’s constitutional guarantee of a remedy on certified questions from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals addressing constitutionality of  Oregon Tort Claim Act's cap on damages)
• Doe v. Lake Oswego School District, 353 Or 321 (2013) (plaintiffs sufficiently alleged facts triggering applicability of the “discovery rule” to determining when limitations period ran on respective sex abuse of minors claims)
• Willemsen v. Invacare Corp., 352 Or 191, 282 P3d 867, cert den, __ US __, 133 S Ct  984, 184 L Ed 2d 762 (January 22, 2013) (In product liability case, trial court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over a foreign corporation is proper and does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.)
• Williams v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 351 Or 368, 271 P3d 103 (December 2, 2011) (State's settlement with tobacco manufacturer in an unrelated case has no effect on manufacturer's obligation to pay State's statutory share of plaintiff's punitive damage award) (Amicus Curiae brief on merits submitted on behalf of several health organizations)

Law Office of Lisa T. Hunt, LLC
PO Box 1562
 Lake Oswego, OR 97035
Tel:  (503) 515-8501
Email:  lthunt@lthuntlaw.com