Leatherman Tool Group sued Coast Cutlery alleging false advertising under the Lanham Act and common law unfair competition, claiming Coast misrepresented that its knives were made of 440C steel, hardened to 57-59 HRC, and individually tested for hardness. After independent testing confirmed the statements were false and Coast admitted using lower-grade 420J2 steel, Coast took some corrective steps such as updating retailer notices and product descriptions but did not fully inform all retailers or recall catalogs. The court concluded Leatherman showed a likelihood of success on the merits, that the balance of equities favored it, and that an injunction would serve the public interest, but denied the motion for a preliminary injunction because Leatherman failed to establish a likelihood of irreparable harm.
This case arose from injuries sustained by plaintiff Michael Cain, a roofer employed by a subcontractor, when he fell from a ladder during a hospital renovation project at Willamette Valley Medical Center. Cain and his wife sued the general contractor Bovis Lend Lease, the hospital, steel fabricator Wylie Steel, and architect ESA, asserting claims under the Oregon Safe Employment Act, the Employer Liability Act, premises liability, negligence, and loss of consortium. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation after de novo review of the record and objections. It granted ESA's motion for partial summary judgment in full, and granted in part and denied in part the summary judgment motions filed by Bovis, Willamette Valley, and Wylie Steel.
This case arose from a physical confrontation at Bridgeport Village shopping mall in Tigard, Oregon, where plaintiffs Jeffrey Giulio and his minor son T.G. were involved in an incident leading to their arrest by local police. Plaintiffs sued the mall's owner BV CenterCal, its property manager CenterCal Properties, and security contractor IPC International, claiming violations of their civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 due to alleged retaliation for voicing customer safety concerns to a television reporter, along with claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligence. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations and granted summary judgment to all defendants on the motions. The core reasoning was that the defendants were not state actors for purposes of the § 1983 claim, did not engage in socially intolerable conduct sufficient for an IIED claim, and owed no heightened duty of care to support the negligence claim based solely on emotional distress damages.
civil rightsfree speechtorts & liabilitycriminal law
The case involved a homeowner who sued Wells Fargo Bank and related parties after his property was sold at a foreclosure auction, asserting a single claim for conversion under three theories: that the deed of trust and notice of sale were invalid because Wells Fargo and Wachovia were not the named beneficiaries, that the successor trustee was improperly appointed when the notice of default issued, and that the bank had represented the sale would be postponed pending a loan modification application but proceeded with the auction anyway. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss or for summary judgment. The core reasoning was that the plaintiff's state-law conversion claims were preempted by federal regulations under the Home Owners' Loan Act governing federal savings banks and their successors, with additional findings that judicially noticed public records defeated certain allegations about the chain of title and trustee authority.
In this case, plaintiff Craig Rapacki sued Chase Home Finance, Northwest Trustee Services (NWTS), and the Federal National Mortgage Association over the foreclosure of his Oregon property, asserting a breach of contract claim against Chase and a wrongful foreclosure claim against all defendants based on alleged defects in the deed of trust assignments, trustee substitution, notice requirements under Oregon statutes, and other procedural issues during the 2009 sale. NWTS moved to dismiss the wrongful foreclosure claim against it for failure to state a claim. The court granted the motion, holding that under Oregon law the trustee owed no fiduciary duty to the borrower and that the complaint failed to allege any other special relationship supporting a tort claim for bad faith; the court also rejected recharacterizing the claim as conversion of real property but allowed the plaintiff leave to amend regarding any personal possessions. The decision rested on the statutory limits on trustee duties and pleading standards requiring plausible factual allegations of misconduct.
In Tocci v. Napolitano, plaintiff Martin Tocci, a 65-year-old former TSA security screener, sued the Secretary of Homeland Security alleging that his 2005 suspension and termination for misconduct involving food items from baggage were pretextual and based on age discrimination, along with related claims for wrongful discharge and intentional infliction of emotional distress under federal and Oregon law. The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss all claims. It held that the wrongful discharge and state-law claims were preempted by the Civil Service Reform Act and thus outside the court's subject-matter jurisdiction, while the federal ADEA claim failed because Tocci did not contact an agency EEO counselor or equivalent official within the required 45 days and offered no valid excuse such as good cause. The court reasoned that contacts with an ombudsman, human resources, or the EEOC did not satisfy the exhaustion requirement under applicable regulations and precedent.