From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weston v. Camp's Lumber Building Supply, Inc.

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jul 12, 2006
206 Or. App. 761 (Or. Ct. App. 2006)

Summary

determining that the products liability statute governed certain common law claims and applying that statutory limitations period to those claims

Summary of this case from Martell v. Gen. Motors LLC

Opinion

0205-05172; A123726.

July 12, 2006.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County. Frank L. Bearden, Judge.

Gary V. Abbott, Ted Sumner, and Abbott Prange, P. C., for petition.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Schuman, Judge, and Wallace, Judge pro tempore.


PER CURIAM

Petition for reconsideration allowed; opinion clarified and adhered to as clarified.


Defendant Camp's Lumber Building Supply, Inc. (Camp's) petitions for reconsideration of our decision reversing in part and remanding in part a judgment in favor of Camp's and other defendants. Weston v. Camp's Lumber Building Supply, Inc., 205 Or App 347, 135 P3d 331 (2006). We grant the petition and adhere to our previous decision.

Camp's contends that, in reversing and remanding as to plaintiffs' claim for breach of warranty, we failed to address its argument that plaintiffs' own evidence established, as a matter of law, that the alleged breach could have been discovered at the time that the lumber was sold to plaintiffs, i.e., at the time of performance. Camp's relies on a sentence in the affidavit of an expert retained by plaintiffs, which stated that the "[l]umber manufactured and supplied by [the lumber defendants] was riddled with obvious signs of golden buprestid infestation (e.g., exposed larval galleries and excavations) prior to the time the lumber was sold to [plaintiffs]." That sentence, when taken in context and read in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, does not speak to whether the signs of beetle infestation would have been obvious to a consumer in plaintiffs' position — as distinguished from a person in the business of manufacturing or supplying lumber. Indeed, the following paragraph in the affidavit states that the lumber defendants had no excuse for ignoring the risks posed by the beetles, given the fact that "[information regarding identification and control of golden buprestid beetle infestation in lumber is readily available to lumber manufacturers and suppliers from many sources." (Emphasis added.) Thus, the affidavit of plaintiffs' expert does not carry Camp's burden to establish the absence of a material issue of fact as to whether the breach could have been discovered by plaintiffs at the time of performance.

Petition for reconsideration allowed; opinion clarified and adhered to as clarified.


Summaries of

Weston v. Camp's Lumber Building Supply, Inc.

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jul 12, 2006
206 Or. App. 761 (Or. Ct. App. 2006)

determining that the products liability statute governed certain common law claims and applying that statutory limitations period to those claims

Summary of this case from Martell v. Gen. Motors LLC
Case details for

Weston v. Camp's Lumber Building Supply, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Jay WESTON and Helen Weston, husband and wife, Appellants, v. CAMP'S…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jul 12, 2006

Citations

206 Or. App. 761 (Or. Ct. App. 2006)
138 P.3d 931

Citing Cases

Weston v. Camp's Lumber Building Supply, Inc.

Argued and submitted September 22, 2005.Judgment on Unlawful Trade Practices Act claim reversed and remanded;…

Weston v. Camp's Lumber

May 14, 2007. Appeal from the ( 206 Or App 761) (petition of Jay and Helen Weston). Petitions for…