From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Corrado v. City of Portland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Feb 28, 2020
Case No. 3:19-cv-01095-SB (D. Or. Feb. 28, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 3:19-cv-01095-SB

02-28-2020

ANDREW CORRADO AND KELLY CORRADO, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF PORTLAND, a municipal subdivision of the State of Oregon, JOHN DOE OFFICERS 1 AND 2, Defendants, And CITY OF PORTLAND, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. JONATHAN T. RANCE, Third-Party Defendant.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

BECKERMAN, U.S. Magistrate Judge.

Third-party defendant Jonathan Rance ("Rance"), a self-represented litigant, filed a negligence counterclaim against third-party plaintiff City of Portland ("City") arising from events that occurred on July 25, 2017. (ECF No. 19.) However, Rance did not plead compliance with the Oregon Tort Claims Act ("OCTA"), which requires a plaintiff to give notice to a public body of an alleged tort "within 180 days after the alleged loss or injury." OR. REV. STAT. § 30.275(2)(b). Therefore, the Court recommends that the district judge grant the City's motion to dismiss Rance's counterclaim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). See Stull v. Maurry, No. 3:13-cv-02211-KI, 2014 WL 183899, at *5 (D. Or. Jan. 14, 2014) ("Under the OTCA, a plaintiff must give notice of his tort claims within 180 days after the alleged loss or injury, and a complaint that fails to allege notice was given in accordance with the OTCA is subject to dismissal."); Denucci v. Henningsen, 248 Or. App. 59, 66 (2012) ("Failure to give timely notice of claim is fatal to a plaintiff's tort claim against a public body.").

The district judge should dismiss the counterclaim without prejudice and provide Rance an opportunity to amend the counterclaim if he can plead in good faith that he timely provided notice of his tort claim to the City. If Rance attempts to amend his counterclaim against the City, he must also include factual allegations specific to the City, as opposed to plaintiffs Andrew and Kelly Corrado. --------

SCHEDULING ORDER

The Court will refer its Findings and Recommendation to a district judge. Objections, if any, are due within fourteen (14) days from service of the Findings and Recommendation. If no objections are filed, the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement on that date. If objections are filed, a response is due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the objections. When the response is due or filed, whichever date is earlier, the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement.

DATED this 28th day of February, 2020.

/s/_________

STACIE F. BECKERMAN

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Corrado v. City of Portland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Feb 28, 2020
Case No. 3:19-cv-01095-SB (D. Or. Feb. 28, 2020)
Case details for

Corrado v. City of Portland

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW CORRADO AND KELLY CORRADO, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF PORTLAND, a…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Feb 28, 2020

Citations

Case No. 3:19-cv-01095-SB (D. Or. Feb. 28, 2020)