Kesterson v. Lewis

1 Citing case

  1. Opal Labs Inc. v. Sprinklr, Inc.

    3:18-cv-01192-HZ (D. Or. Aug. 20, 2021)   Cited 4 times

    However, the Oregon Court of Appeals has held that “a party may voluntarily waive the right by agreement.” Hays Group, Inc. v. Biege, 222 Or.App. 347, 351, 193 P.3d 1028 (2008) (citing Carrier v. Hicks, 316 Or. 341, 352, 851 P.2d 581 (1993)); see also Barackman v. Anderson, 338 Or. 365, 371, 109 P.3d 1070 (2005) (“Constitutional rights may be waived, however, and the right to a jury trial is one of those rights that may be waived.”); Kesterson v. Lewis, 126 Or.App. 329, 334, 868 P.2d 1350 (1994) (finding that “a party can waive the right to a jury trial in ways other than those described in ORCP 51C, even if the case is exclusively at law”). While Plaintiff is correct that most cases involving waiver of this right arise in the context of arbitration agreements, Plaintiff has not identified any reason that the Oregon appellate court's unambiguous statements that this right may be waived would not apply to agreements like the Teaming Agreement involved in this case.