State supreme court reverses decision on remedies clause

Fifteen years ago, in Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that workers whose claims for workers' comp benefits are denied on certain grounds can bring a civil lawsuit against the employer for the injury.

On May 5, in Horton v. OHSU, the court concluded that it misinterpreted the "remedies clause" in its Smothers decision. After an exhaustive review of the history and case law underlying Oregon's adoption of that clause, the court concluded that the clause does not provide absolute protection for an individual's right to a remedy, but allows for a broader analysis focused on a balancing of interests.

Horton is not a workers' comp case. Still, based on its new interpretation of the "remedies clause," the court has expressly overruled its Smothers decision. In doing so, however, the court stated that it was leaving for future cases the question of whether, in the workers' comp context, it would reach the same result as it did in Smothers under its new "remedies clause" analysis.

The court's decision in Horton will not have any immediate impact on pending lawsuits brought under Smothers. Only time will tell whether such actions will be limited or prohibited under Horton.

Questions about this decision? Contact SAIF attorney Julie Masters, 503.373.8620.