Motion to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim in Oregon

Background

“Dismissal of the action for failure to state a claim [is] only proper if the complaint shows on its face that plaintiff cannot prevail.” (See H H Electric, Inc. v. City of Portland (1988) 92 Or. App. 466, 468.)

“A complaint may fail to state a cause of action for two reasons. It may affirmatively show on its face that, if all the allegations are true, the plaintiff has no cause of action.” (See Fulton Ins. v. White Motor Corp. (1972) 261 Or. 206, 216.)

“Or it may merely fail to state a cause of action because it omits some necessary allegation which, if added, would not be inconsistent with the facts already alleged.” (See id.)

General Information for Complaints and Motions

“When reviewing an order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, we accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and give the party opposing the motion the benefit of all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts.” (See Paul v. Providence Health System-Oregon (2010) 237 Or. App. 584, 586.)

“The court evaluates the facts to determine whether they entitle the pleader to relief on any legal theory.” (See Fogh v. McRill (1998) 153 Or. App. 159, 170.)

"While a claim for relief may fail to plead a specific theory, it should not be dismissed if it pleads a claim for relief under some theory, even if it was not the one the plaintiff intended." (See id.)

Standard of Review and Burdens of Proof

“Whether a complaint was properly dismissed for failure to state a claim is a question of law; we treat the facts alleged in the complaint as true.” (See Praegitzer Industries v. Rollins Burdick Hunter (1994) 129 Or. App. 628, 632.)

“Under ORCP 54B(2) the defendant moves for dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief." (See Matter of the Marriage of Castro (1981) 51 Or. App. 707, 711.)

“Furthermore, [t]he court as trier of the facts may then determine them and render judgment of dismissal against the plaintiff or may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence." (See id.)

The Court’s Decisions

It is well settled that “a pleading that contains an allegation of material fact as to each element of the claim for relief, even if vague, is sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.” (See Dymock v. Norwest (2001) 172 Or. App. 399, 401.)

It is also well settled that “the general rule is that a complaint must contain factual allegations that, if proved, establish the right to the relief sought. Indeed, the Supreme Court has held that, whatever the theory of recovery, facts must be alleged which, if proved, will establish the right to recover.” (See Moser v. Mark (2008) 223 Or. App. 52, 57.)