Richer v. Poisson
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1DissentArmstrong, J.
I concur in the majority’s decision to affirm the summary judgment for defendant on plaintiff Lee Richer’s claim for malicious prosecution, but write separately on that claim to emphasize what I believe to be the correct analysis of it. I dissent from the decision to reverse the dismissal of plaintiffs’ claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress for failure to state a claim.
The elements of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress are well established in Oregon. To state such a claim, a plaintiff must allege facts on which a factfinder could find
“that the defendant…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hall v. May Department Stores Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
- Rogers v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Whelan v. Albertson's, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- Humbert v. KNUTSONOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Paulsen v. Continental Porsche Audi, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.