Legal Opinion

Hammond v. Central Lane Communications Center

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided August 22, 1991No. CC 16-87-09193; CA A50155; SC S37277PublishedCited by 70 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*20VANHOOMISSEN, J.

This is a tort action for damages based on theories of negligent and reckless infliction of severe emotional distress. Plaintiff alleges that she sustained psychic and emotional injuries as a result of the manner in which defendants responded to a 9-1-1 call that she made concerning her husband and as a result of the manner in which defendants designed the Lane County 9-1-1 emergency telephone system. The trial court granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment. ORCP 47.1 The Court of Appeals affirmed. Hammond v. Central Lane Communications Center, 101 Or App 569, 792 P2d…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Fazzolari v. Portland School District No. 1JOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Seeborg v. General Motors CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Hall v. May Department Stores Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Norwest v. Presbyterian Intercommunity HospitalOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Brewer v. ErwinOregon Supreme Court · 1979

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by70 opinions

  1. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. GottshallSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Camper v. MinorTennessee Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Doe Ex Rel. Doe v. Roman Catholic Diocese of NashvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Philibert v. KluserOregon Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Curtis v. MRI IMAGING SERVICES IIOregon Supreme Court · 1998

65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API