What's Happening at Hart Wagner

Karen O’Kasey and Ruth Casby prevailed yesterday on a motion for summary judgment dismissing a federal lawsuit alleging an employer’s violation of due process. The plaintiff sought damages of $500,000 claiming he was denied constitutional due process protections when he was discharged from his job as Clatskanie School District’s maintenance supervisor. US District Court Judge Marco Hernandez agreed with the defendants’ legal analysis, ruling that plaintiff’s claim had no merit because his at-will employment did not give rise to a constitutionally protected property interest and, as such, his employer did not need to comply with due process protections. This ruling made it unnecessary for the court to consider defendants’ alternative position that plaintiff’s claim failed because he received due process before and after his discharge.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a published decision in Barnes v. Routh Crabtree Olsen affirming the Oregon district court’s judgment dismissing plaintiff’s action against a Portland law firm and its attorneys alleging claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Unfair Trade Practices Act  (UTPA) arising from a judicial foreclosure proceeding. Hart Wagner appellate attorney, Janet Schroer represented the attorney defendants in the appeal.  The Ninth Circuit initially affirmed the trial court dismissal in 2018, but thereafter, granted reconsideration in light of the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Obdusky v. McCarthy & Holtus LLP, 139 S. Ct. 1029 (2019). The Ninth Circuit reviewed the question held open in Obdusky, whether the FDCPA applies to a judicial foreclosure. It held that if a creditor in a judicial foreclosure is simply enforcing a security interest by retaking or forcing a sale of the property, and not seeking any deficiency judgment or to collect any other monetary debt, then the creditor’s actions do not fall within the FDCPA, or the related provision in the UTPA.

The Oregon Court of Appeals recently reversed a $1.5 million dollar judgment that had been entered against a Hart Wagner client, a bank acting as the trustee for a trust that operated several commercial buildings in downtown Portland.  Partner Matt Kalmanson handled the appeal.   The trial court had ruled that the bank converted funds from the trust’s beneficiaries by charging them certain fees necessary to manage the building.   Mr. Kalmanson convinced the Oregon Court of Appeals to reverse.  The Court of Appeals specifically rejected the argument that the plaintiff had established, as a matter of law, that Hart Wagner’s client wrongfully received any funds or charged any improper fees.