Otterness v. City of Waldport
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
Plaintiffs appeal a judgment dismissing their complaint for failure to state a claim. We affirm.
In reviewing a dismissal for failure to state a claim, “we consider as true the facts alleged and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom,” Glubka v. Long, 115 Or App 236, 238, 837 P2d 553 (1992), and ignore allegations that contain mere conclusions of law. Porter v. Hill, 314 Or 86, 97, 838 P2d 45 (1992); Messmer v. Carter/Bonded Credit Co., 282 Or 323, 326, 578 P2d 788 (1978).
Plaintiffs’ amended complaint alleges:
“2. * * * At all material times, Defendant had duties under the laws…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hall v. May Department Stores Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
- Hammond v. Central Lane Communications CenterOregon Supreme Court · 1991
- Porter v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- Glubka v. LongCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Owen v. BradleyOregon Supreme Court · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Neighorn v. Quest Health CareDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2012
- Drake v. Mutual of Enumclaw InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- DeParrie v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
- Maldini v. Marriott International, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2020