''Clarke v. OHSU'', 343 Or. 581, 175 P.3d 418 (2007), was a 2007 decision of the
Oregon Supreme Court
The Oregon Supreme Court (OSC) is the highest state court in the U.S. state of Oregon. The only court that may reverse or modify a decision of the Oregon Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of the United States.tort
A tort is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable ...
liability of public employees.
Background
The plaintiff, Jordaan Michael Clarke, underwent successful heart surgery as an infant in 1998 at Oregon Health Sciences University (now Oregon Health and Science University, or OHSU) hospital, but suffered prolonged oxygen deprivation causing permanent and profound brain damage. His parents sued OHSU and the individuals treating him (several doctors, a respiratory therapist, and a nurse) on his behalf, seeking damages in excess of $17 million: $11,073,506 for lifetime medical and life care, $1,200,000 for lost earning capacity, and $5,000,000 for non-economic damages.Clarke v. OHSU, Oregon Supreme Court No. S53868 (slip op., Dec. 17, 2007).
The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings on OHSU's motion. OHSU did not dispute negligence and argued that the statutory liability limits for suits against state agencies applied. Clarke was awarded a total of $100,000 economic damages and $100,000 non-economic damages in accordance with the limits.
In 2006, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's ruling, holding that as to the individual defendants, the combination of applying the damage limits to claims against OHSU and allowing this substitution to supersede Clarke's
common law
In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions."The common law is not a brooding omnipresen ...
claims against the individual defendants, resulting in an award of less than two percent of Clarke's damages, was not a sufficiently substantial substitution of remedies. Therefore, the court held, the limits violated a provision in the
Oregon Constitution
The Oregon Constitution is the governing document of the U.S. state of Oregon, originally enacted in 1857. As amended the current state constitution contains eighteen sections, beginning with a bill of rights.
that "every man shall have remedy by due course of law for injury done him in his person, property, or reputation." The Court of Appeals also held that the limits could constitutionally be applied to Clarke's claims against OHSU, reasoning that OHSU, as a public corporation, would have been entitled to governmental immunity from suit prior to enactment of the statute.Or. Const., Art. I, ยง 10.
Oregon Supreme Court decision
OHSU and the individual defendants requested discretionary review by the
Oregon Supreme Court
The Oregon Supreme Court (OSC) is the highest state court in the U.S. state of Oregon. The only court that may reverse or modify a decision of the Oregon Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of the United States.
Justice Balmer, joined by Justice Kistler, issued a concurring opinion to the Supreme Court decision, in which they called for the legislature to increase the statutory limits for damages against the government and indicated that they thought a less disproportionate limit might be constitutional.