Legal Opinion

McLaughlin v. Wilson

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 31, 2018No. A160000PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGarrett, J.

*103ORS 659A.030(1)(f) prohibits certain retaliatory employment actions by "any person." In this case, plaintiff asserted a claim under that statute against defendant, an individual with whom she previously worked. Defendant argued that the statute did not cover his conduct as alleged. The trial court agreed, and dismissed the claim under ORCP 21 A(8). On appeal, plaintiff assigns error to the trial court's ruling, arguing that the court misconstrued the statute. We conclude that the trial court erred, and therefore reverse and remand as to the retaliation claim, and otherwise affirm.

Reviewing…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  2. Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. WyattOregon Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Vaughn v. Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McLaughlin v. WilsonOregon Supreme Court · 2019
  2. Dept. of Human Services v. T. B.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  3. Caswell v. Day Law and Associates, P. C.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  4. Dept. of Human Services v. T. B.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  5. Estate of Torres v. Kennewick School District No 17District Court, E.D. Washington · 2023

1 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