|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|General Bell v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transporation District of Oregon|
|Supreme Court Courtroom|
|Willard Merkel on behalf of General Bell|
Kimberly A. Sewell on behalf of Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation Disrict of Oregon
Statement of Issues:
|General Bell v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (S060373) (A145225) (appeal from Multnomah County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 247 Or App 666, 271 P3d 138 (2012)).|
Plaintiff General Bell, as personal representative of the estate of Thomas Bell, has been granted review of a Court of Appeals decision affirming a trial court decision that dismissed plaintiff's personal injury action against defendant Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon.
On review, the issue is:
Whether ORS 30.075(1) constitutes a "statute providing a limitation on the commencement of an action, " to which ORS 30.275(9) would apply, or instead whether ORS 30.075(1) is a type of tolling or procedural statute to which ORS 30.275(9) would not apply, analogous to the statute considered by the Oregon Supreme Court in Baker v. City of Lakeside, 343 Or 70, 83 164 P3d 259 (2007).
The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating: