LOC News
Recreational Immunity at Risk After Court of Appeals Opinion in Slip and Fall Case
On July 6, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued an opinion impacting public entities and recreational immunity. This case involved a slip and fall claim where the plaintiff, while on their way to the beach, was injured while walking their dog on an improved trail which was owned and maintained by the city of Newport.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the city on its recreational immunity defense. The trial court determined “there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute” and that under state law, the plaintiff was “using the trail for recreational purposes” by “walking her dog on a trail to the beach with a friend,” and thus entitled to recreational immunity from any liability. The plaintiff appealed the judgment, arguing in relevant part that there are issues of material fact concerning whether her principal purpose (as required under state law) in walking on the trail was recreational or to access Agate Beach.
The Oregon Court of Appeals decided that an issue of material fact existed about whether the plaintiff’s use of the trail was recreational in nature or only for the purpose of accessing the beach. If, on remand, the principal purpose of the plaintiff using the trail was for accessing the beach, the court opined that recreational use immunity would not apply and therefore the city is liable for the plaintiff’s injuries.
It is expected that the city of Newport will appeal this matter to the Oregon Supreme Court. Additionally, the LOC lobbying team will push for a statutory amendment to the recreational immunity statutes.
LOC members are encouraged to reach out to their legal counsel with concerns related to this matter. The full Oregon Court of Appeals opinion may be accessed here.
Contact: Jayme Pierce, General Counsel - jpierce@orcities.org
Last Updated 7/14/23