HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
April 15, 2003 Hearing Room 357
1:00 pm Tapes 141
- 142
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. Max Williams, Chair
Rep. Robert Ackerman, Vice-Chair
Rep. Gordon Anderson, Vice-Chair
Rep. Jeff Barker
Rep. Bob Jenson
Rep. Jerry Krummel
Rep. Greg Macpherson
Rep. Floyd Prozanski
Rep. Lane Shetterly
STAFF PRESENT: Bill
Joseph, Counsel
Nancy Massee, Committee Assistant
MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:
HB 2581 work session
HB 2066 work session
HB 2279 work session
HB 2235 work session
HB 2103 work session
HB 2658 work session
HB 2080 work session
These minutes are in
compliance with Senate and House Rules.
Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact
words. For complete contents,
please refer to the tapes.
|
TAPE/# |
Speaker |
Comments |
|
TAPE 141,
A |
||
|
005 |
Chair Williams |
Opens meeting at 1:22 pm. Opens work session on HB
2581. |
|
HB 2581
WORK SESSION |
||
|
014 |
Bill Joseph |
Committee Counsel.
Explains HB 2581 which allows governing body to commence proceeding in
circuit court to determine regularity and legality of certain actions of
governing body. |
|
018 |
Chair Williams |
States the committee’s concern that the language
created issue of claim preclusion for parties who are not party to initial
action seeking determination. |
|
023 |
Hannah Mills |
Legislative Counsel. Explains how the bill is written. Describes the adverse party. |
|
060 |
Vice Chair Ackerman |
Discusses claim preclusion. Refers to ORS 33.720 sub
6, which sets up notice requirement. |
|
064 |
Mills |
Responds it does give notice to parties. |
|
067 |
Vice Chair Ackerman |
States that if notice is given to a party, and the
party answers joins the issues specified in the complaint, there is
controversy to be ruled upon. States aside from the notice requirement there
could be staff effort of the governing body to identify interested parties
that might file answers and litigate the case. |
|
080 |
Mills |
Says she did not consider that part of the statute. |
|
087 |
Vice Chair Ackerman |
Asks if a complaint was filed to consider the
validity of certain municipal action, if the complaint did identify all
relevant issues, that would be a matter by which issue preclusion could be
avoided. |
|
091 |
Mills |
Answers the courts have difficulty ruling when they
do not have every issue that could possibly happen. |
|
096 |
Vice Chair Ackerman |
Answers that is characteristic of most litigation. Supports the bill. |
|
111 |
Joseph |
Discusses offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel. |
|
165 |
Chair Williams |
Declares it seems like it does broaden. Hesitates
because it may not provide the protection a municipality wants. |
|
189 |
Christy Munson |
League of Oregon Cities. Says the League supports HB
2581 with future changes. |
|
200 |
Joseph |
Comments the bill, assuming the notice gets to a
party that has an issue, would be
decided and litigated as part of the decision. |
|
213 |
Vice Chair Ackerman |
Describes thinly drafted complaints that cause
problems. Comments that existing law works. |
|
230 |
Joseph |
Explains the -1 and the -2 amendments from Rep.
Ackerman (EXHIBITS A and B). |
|
231 |
Rep.
Ackerman |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2581-2 amendments dated
3/28/03. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
232 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
233 |
Rep.
Ackerman |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2581-1 amendments dated
3/28/03. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
234 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
235 |
Rep.
Ackerman |
MOTION: Moves HB 2581 to the floor with a DO PASS
AS AMENDED recommendation. |
|
236 |
Rep.
Shetterly |
Declares
reservations regarding HB 2581. |
|
237 |
Rep.
Jenson |
Declares
reservations regarding HB 2581. |
|
238 |
Rep. Krummel |
Supports HB 2581. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
7-2 AYE: 7 - Ackerman, Anderson, Barker, Krummel,
Macpherson, Prozanski, Williams NAY: 2 - Jenson, Shetterly |
|
239 |
Rep. Prozanski |
Declares reservations regarding HB 2581. |
|
240 |
Chair
Williams |
The motion
CARRIES. REP.
ACKERMAN will lead the discussion on the floor. |
|
241 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session on HB 2581. Opens work session on HB 2066. |
|
HB 2066
WORK SESSION |
||
|
242 |
Chair Williams |
Reviews previous testimony on HB 2066 which makes
miscellaneous changes to laws governing courts. Refers to the -15 and -16
amendments already approved by the committee (EXHIBITS C and D). There
is no fiscal impact. |
|
243 |
Rep.
Shetterly |
MOTION: Moves HB 2066 to the floor with a DO PASS
AS AMENDED recommendation and the SUBSEQUENT REFERRAL to the committee on
Ways and Means BE RESCINDED. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
244 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. REP. WILLIAMS will lead discussion on
the floor. |
|
245 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session on HB 2066. Opens work session on HB 2279. |
|
HB 2279
WORK SESSION |
||
|
258 |
Bill Joseph |
Committee Counsel.
Reviews previous hearing of HB 2279 which enacts Revised Uniform
Arbitration Act. The -4 amendments were approved by the committee previously.
Discusses the -3 amendments (EXHIBIT
E). |
|
TAPE 142,
A |
||
|
040 |
James Damis |
Oregon State Bar. Explains why HB 2279 is needed and
the amendments. |
|
062 |
Rep.
Shetterly |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2279-3 amendments dated
3/19/03. |
|
063 |
Rep.
Jenson |
Asks
questions regarding HB 2279-3. |
|
069 |
Damis |
Responds
to questions |
|
080 |
Chair
Williams |
Responds
to questions. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
093 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
094 |
Rep.
Shetterly |
MOTION: Moves HB 2279 to the floor with a DO PASS AS
AMENDED recommendation. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
095 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. REP. BARKER will lead discussion on
the floor. |
|
100 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session HB 2279. Opens work session on HB 2235. |
|
HB 2235
WORK SESSION |
||
|
126 |
Bill Joseph |
Committee Counsel Explains previous discussion on HB
2235 which modifies provisions relating to private security providers.
Explains -1 and -2 amendments (EXHIBITS
F and G). |
|
138 |
Scott Tighe |
Division Director, Standards and Certification
Division, Department of Public Safety
Standards and Training. Supports the -1 and -2 amendments. |
|
143 |
Harold Burkesimmers |
Director of Public Safety, University of Portland. Chair,
Private Security Advisory Committee.
Testifies in support of HB 2235. |
|
155 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2235-1 amendments dated
2/20/03. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
158 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
160 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2235-2 amendments dated
3/21/03. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
161 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
162 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves HB 2235 to the floor with a DO PASS
AS AMENDED recommendation. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
163 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. REP. ANDERSON will lead discussion on
the floor. |
|
164 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session on HB 2235. Opens work session on HB 2103. |
|
HB 2103
WORK SESSION |
||
|
172 |
Bill Joseph |
Committee Counsel. Explains HB 2103 which prohibits
person from selling, leasing or renting payment processing system that
provides receipt with more information about customer than last four digits
of customer’s credit or debit card number. Explains the concerns from
previous hearing. |
|
188 |
Cheryl Pellegrini |
Department of Justice (DOJ). Explains the -1
amendment (EXHIBIT H). Notes interested parties have agreed to
amendment. |
|
216 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2103-1 amendments dated
4/7/03. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
217 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
218 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves HB 2103 to the floor with a DO PASS
AS AMENDED recommendation. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
219 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. REP. KRUMMEL will lead discussion on
the floor. |
|
220 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session on HB 2103. Opens work session on HB 2658. |
|
HB 2658 WORK SESSION |
||
|
TAPE 141,
B |
||
|
010 |
Bill Joseph |
Committee Counsel. Reiterates testimony on HB 2658
which exempts public employee and volunteer Social Security numbers from
disclosure under public records law. Explains the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT I). |
|
024 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2658-1 amendments dated
3/31/03. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
025 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. |
|
026 |
Rep.
Prozanski |
MOTION: Moves HB 2103 to the floor with a DO PASS
AS AMENDED recommendation. |
|
|
|
VOTE:
9-0 |
|
027 |
Chair Williams |
Hearing no objection, declares the
motion CARRIED. REP. KRUMMEL will lead discussion on
the floor. |
|
030 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session on HB 2658. Opens work session on HB 2080. |
|
HB 2080
WORK SESSION |
||
|
040 |
Richard Lane |
Oregon Trial Lawyers Association. Testifies in support of HB 2080 and the -1
amendments (EXHIBIT J). Discusses Gladhart v. Oregon Vineyard Supply Co.
|
|
050 |
Linda Eyerman |
Attorney, Portland. Discusses reasons for HB
2080. Testifies in support of HB 2080
and submits testimony (EXHIBIT K).
|
|
110 |
Eyerman |
Continues presenting HB 2080 issues. Discusses need for an explicit discovery
rule. Says products liability actions do not have discovery provisions.
Mentions Oregon Supreme Court case PGE
v. BOLI. |
|
166 |
Eyerman |
Discusses what will happen to Oregon consumers if
rule is not adopted. Explains the -1
amendments have three purposes.
|
|
180 |
Rep. Barker |
Asks if this does not change the 8-year original
statute of repose. |
|
186 |
Eyerman |
Responds there is no intent to change the statute of
repose. |
|
200 |
Chair Williams |
Asks about language in section 2 relating to revival
of actions. |
|
220 |
Eyerman |
Says the intent is to be specific to a category of
cases that were dismissed based on the Gladhart
rule and have been dismissed within two years of the effective date of the
law. |
|
240 |
Chair Williams |
Questions lines 8 through 13 in the -1 amendments.
Asks if this language is borrowed or codified case law. |
|
263 |
Eyerman |
Answers it was drafted by Legislative Counsel. ORS
30.908 provided the language. |
|
270 |
Lane |
Refers to lines 8 to 13, and Gaston v Parsons, a medical malpractice case. |
|
272 |
Eyerman |
Adds that Gladhart
case defined a legally cognizable harm. Injury was defined as when the harm was incurred which was inconsistent with
earlier cases. Explains the need for the -1 amendments. |
|
280 |
Rep. Shetterly |
Discusses identifying when harm occurs. |
|
285 |
Eyerman |
Replies that types of products fall under Gladhart involve pharmaceuticals,
medical devices and products with latent injuries because they do not show
signs of defectiveness. |
|
290 |
Chair Williams |
Describes letter from Lindsay, Hart, Neil and
Weigler (EXHIBIT L) in opposition
to HB 2080. |
|
295 |
Eyerman |
Explains previous to 1977 products liability cases
were treated as negligence. Discusses ORS Chapter 12 and the discovery rule.
Explains the exceptions statute in 1983. Continues relating the history of
products liability law. |
|
330 |
Lane |
Adds information about asbestos and breast implant cases
deal with ultimate repose area. |
|
TAPE 142,
B |
||
|
062 |
Chair Williams |
Cites those in opposition to HB 2080, Jim Markee,
Paul Cosgrove, and Julie Brandis. |
|
087 |
Jim Markee |
PhRMA Pharmaceutical. Testifies in opposition to HB
2080 and submits testimony (EXHIBIT M).
|
|
100 |
Paul Cosgrove |
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. Testifies in opposition to HB 2080. |
|
118 |
Julie Brandis |
Association of Oregon Industries (AOI). Testifies in opposition to HB 2080 which will
increase product liability lawsuits and the cost of doing business. |
|
130 |
Chair Williams |
Discusses latent defect cases. Wonders how does it not essentially operate
as a 2-year ultimate statute of repose. |
|
135 |
Cosgrove |
Responds that question is under discussion. |
|
166 |
Chair Williams |
Comments on ultimate repose of 8 years. |
|
170 |
Markee |
Says he did not see the -1 amendments until this
meeting. Says the 8 years is rendered useless. |
|
172 |
Chair Williams |
Asks the parties to look at the -1 amendments. |
|
186 |
Rep. Shetterly |
Comments on losing one’s rights before you know you
have them. |
|
190 |
Scott Gallant |
Oregon Medical Association (OMA). Addresses the -1amendments
which he has just seen. |
|
229 |
Gallant |
States HB 2080 has major implications and needs
review. |
|
239 |
Rep. Shetterly |
Discusses latent defect on medical products. |
|
300 |
Gallant |
Replies this needs to be looked at carefully. |
|
307 |
Rep. Prozanski |
Asks if there is a timeframe for this bill. |
|
314 |
Chair Williams |
Closes work session on HB 2080. Adjourns meeting at 3:05 pm. |
EXHIBIT
SUMMARY
A
– HB 2581-1 amendment, Rep. Ackerman, 1 p
B
– HB 2581-2 amendment, Rep. Ackerman, 1 p
C
– HB 2066-15 amendment, staff, 3 pp
D
– HB 2066-16 amendment, staff, 2 pp
E
– HB 2779-3 amendment, James Damis, 4 pp
F
– HB 2235-1 amendment, staff, 1 p
G
– HB 2235-2 amendment, staff, 2 pp
H
– HB 2103-1 amendment, Cheryl Pellegrini, 1 p
I - HB 2658-1 amendment, staff, 1 p
J
– HB 2080-1 amendment, staff, 2 pp
K
– HB 2080, written testimony, Linda Eyerman, 1 p
L
– HB 2080, written testimony, Jim Markee for Lindsay, Hart, Neil and Weigler, 2
pp
M
– HB 2080, written testimony, Jim Markee, 1 p
N
– HB 2080, written testimony, staff for National Federation of Independent
Business (NFIB)