Legal Opinion

Hammond v. Central Lane Communications Center

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 23, 1990No. 16-87-09193; CA A50155PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Plaintiff appeals from the summary judgment for defendants in this action for “outrageous conduct” and for negligence.

On July 28, 1986, plaintiff found her husband lying on the kitchen floor in their home. She called 911, and the operator concluded from plaintiffs answers to his questions that the husband was probably dead. The operator told plaintiff, “We’ll have someone there in just a couple minutes.” The 911 system is operated by defendant Central Lane Communications Center (center), but it routes requests for services to other agencies rather than performing them itself. The center…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hall v. May Department Stores Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Norwest v. Presbyterian Intercommunity HospitalOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Horwell v. Oregon Episcopal SchoolCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hammond v. Central Lane Communications CenterOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Hammond v. Central Lane Communications CenterOregon Supreme Court · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API