Chapman v. Mayfield

The majority concludes that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to defendant because plaintiffs had not presented evidence sufficient to create a factual dispute that Mayfield’s violent acts were the *539foreseeable result of defendant’s service of alcohol to Mayfield while he was visibly intoxicated. 263 Or App at 530. Because I disagree that summary judgment was appropriate, I dissent.

To frame my dispute with the majority’s conclusion, I set forth the relevant legal history, framework, and social context. In 1987, the Oregon Supreme Court clarified the negligence standard…