Oregon Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

In the past week, I've received five calls from people in Portland, Eugene, & Lake Oswego, Oregon who want to sue their former Attorneys. The cases have ranged from simple to complex to no cases at all.

The classic example came from one caller, "I had a car accident and my attorney did not file the lawsuit on time." With a situation like that, my job is to determine what the client should have received from the lawsuit ("damages"), and then pursue the claim against the lawyer to pay the damages instead of the guy who caused the car accident. Fortunately, in Oregon, all attorneys have a minimum amount of malpractice of $300,000.

Another caller really had no case. In Eugene, she had a car accident. Her lawyer, she said, worked slowly and did not return her calls. She fired him and hired a second law firm. In the end, she received the policy limits on her Underinsured Motorist Policy. Unfortunately, the total dollar amount was still too small to cover her total losses. But that was not the fault of the attorney.

Yet another caller hired me to review complex business litigation involving motions for restraining orders and injunctive relief. Things did not work out as planned, and his company suffered losses. I was able to review the matters and give my "second opinion" on what the first lawyers had done.

Professionals, whether they are doctors, attorneys or real estate salespeople, owe their clients the duty to provide services to the standard of care provided by other such professionals. If they do not, and if it causes you a loss, then you have a right to sue. Every case involves the same questions:

1. What would other professional have done under the circumstances?
2. Did your attorney (or doctor or realtor) meet that "standard of care?"
3. Did the breach of the standard of care result in a change of circumstances or outcome? If so, then,
4. What is the dollar value of the loss?

Those are the questions to consider if you have a problem with your lawyer. And remember, claims against Oregon Attorneys must be filed within two years of the date a person should have known he or she had a claim.

Jeff Merrick, Oregon Trial Attorney
503-665-4234

The above is not legal advice. I cannot give you sound advice without knowing more information. It is intended to raise some issues for you to discuss with your own lawyer.

Monday in Portland, Oregon was typical. The weather changed from nice to rainy, I had my plan to work for four different clients. My plans always get a bit side-tracked by people who call seeking help from an attorney. Today, I reviewed records and spoke with a Salem man who wants to sue his spine surgeon for medical malpractice, a Portland woman who asked me about sexual harassment, and a Portland man who discovered unhealthful mold in his rental condominium. I will not represent any of them.

So, together, I probably gave away 1-½ hours of my time today. I don't mind; it's part of my job. Usually, I'm happy to help. However, sometimes people think that I should give more than my initial screening and initial thoughts. Some get quite indignant, as if I'm wrong to want to be paid for my 30 years of legal study and practice. When I ask them if they would be willing to donate their time to help me with my issues, like yard work or cleaning the garage, often, they get my point.

Pro bono is a term that refers to free help from attorneys for needy people or causes. Typically, attorneys recognized for pro bono work are big firm lawyers who do not bill for a particular job, yet never miss a paycheck. They carefully track their hours (perhaps the firm gets a tax break). Then, they can say they donated 30 hours for a particular cause. That's good, and they deserve recognition.

For lawyers who help people -- "plaintiff's lawyers" as we are known -- we give out free help to people just about every day. In a year, I probably give over 200 hours of time, and other plaintiff's lawyers probably do the same. I help a lot of people: both those who think they have a claim plus those who do not get sued because I explained the law to someone who wanted to sue them.

Here's my best potential client (PC) question:

PC: My boss at work was harassing me and then he fired me. I'm probably the best worker on site. I think I have a case.

Me: Why do you suppose he did that?

PC: I slept with his wife, but they were separated at the time. . . .

Sorry dude, sleeping with the boss's wife is not protected activity.

Jeff Merrick, Oregon Trial Attorney
Injury & Employment Law
503-665-4234

This week in Portland, Oregon, Deanna B. testified against her former employer, Brookdale Senior Living, Inc. (NYSE: BKD). Ms. Bettencourt used to provide care for residents of Wynwood Mt. Hood, an assisted living facility. Like other such facilities and nursing homes in Oregon, Wynwood Mt. Hood has been cited for abuse and neglect because it employed too few employees to care for residents.

During Deanna's tenure, the assisted living facility served 82 residents. Brookdale promised those 82 residents services that would take a full page to list, including meals, laundry, help getting to appointments, help getting to the toilet (or cleaning up when help came too late), help with pets, medication, etc. Last year, the State of Oregon cited Brookdale when resident needs were not being met because it employed only two people on night shift for all residents. Obviously, when both employees were needed to help someone get to the bathroom, no one was available to assist any of the other 81 people.

The stingy ways of the Executive Director included altering the time cards of employees without their knowledge. Deanna complained about it. She challenged the integrity of her boss, repeatedly. Her boss then changed her working situation, wrote her up for things, and fired her. We sued, alleging that the company retaliated against Deanna for making her wage claims and accusing the company of stealing from her.

During the litigation, we have discovered other practices that we believe are improper. For example, those three employees on night shift must remain on call, even during their meal periods. They cannot take lunch or dinner in their cars. Employees remain on call to assist residents. Yet, despite being on call, Brookdale Senior Living does not pay them for their on-call time. We believe that violates wage statutes and is more evidence of how the company does whatever it can to reduce costs, whether or not proper. See, OAR 839-020-0004(20) & 839-020-0041.

I've sued assisted living facilities / nursing homes before, and I've learned too much to remain naive. I've told my wife that if I ever need to be in one long term, please leave a gun under my pillow. I'd rather kill myself than live in some of these places, in which the facility does not keep all of the bright promises made to prospective residents and their loved ones.

Jeff Merrick, Oregon Trial Attorney
Injury & Employment Law
503-665-4234

The above is not legal advice. I cannot give you sound advice without knowing more information. It is intended to raise some issues for you to discuss with your own lawyer.

Oregon's Statute of Limitations for filing a car accident injury lawsuit is two years, generally. There are exceptions. Last week, Oregon's Court of Appeals confirmed another exception that allowed an injured woman to continue a lawsuit she filed over three years after the motor vehicle accident.

This exception arises when the insurance company pays for some or all damage to the car or truck. There's a law that is supposed to encourage payment. It says that if the insurance company pays, it is not admitting liability. In other words, the insurance company can still fight you on who actually caused the car accident. On the other hand, if the injured person gets a check for damage to the car, she might think that the insurance company is NOT going to fight the personal injury claim for medical bills and other monetary damages, too.

The exception to the two-year statute of limitations deals with this risk of confusion. ORS 12.155 says the insurance company must tell the injured person when the statute of limitations expires within 30 days of the time it pays for property damage. If it does not, then the 2-year statute of limitations is placed on hold, or "tolled." The two-year clock starts running again when the insurance company sends the letter stating when is the deadline for filing the lawsuit.

This exception applies to the owners of the car, not necessarily to a passenger.

Take home points:

• There are exceptions to the two-year statute of limitations for personal injury lawsuits in Oregon.
• One of the exceptions applies to owners of the motor vehicle when the insurance company pays for property damage but does not disclose when is the deadline for filing the lawsuit.

Jeff Merrick, Oregon Trial Attorney
Injury & Employment Law
503-665-4234

The above is not legal advice. I cannot give you sound advice without knowing more information. It is intended to raise some issues for you to discuss with your own lawyer.