Jerrold W. Jones, Petitioner on Review v. General Motors Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Wentworth…

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court held that the 1995 amendment to ORCP 47 C codified, without material change, the summary judgment standards previously announced by the court, and did not shift the burden of production to a nonmoving party on issues as to which that party would bear the burden of proof at trial. Because the moving parties bore the burden of establishing the absence of a triable issue even on the assumed 'idiosyncrasy' question, and the record did not establish without contradiction that plaintiff's sensitivity was idiosyncratic, the trial court erred in granting defendants summary judgment. The court further held that three 1986 United States Supreme Court decisions construing FRCP 56 were not context binding construction of the amendment, because only federal cases predating Oregon's 1975 enactment of its summary judgment statute receive great weight, and the amendment added one sentence without reenacting the balance of the rule. The court affirmed the Court of Appeals in part on different grounds, reversed the circuit court's judgment, and remanded.