Cropp v. Interstate Distributor Co.
Oregon Court of Appeals
129 Or. App. 510, 880 P.2d 464 (1994)
- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
The Cropps (plaintiffs), a married Oregon couple and self-employed truck drivers, sued Interstate Distributor Co. (defendant) and Rust, an Interstate driver, (defendant) for damages for personal injuries and property damage they sustained when their parked truck was struck in California by an Interstate truck that was being driven by Rust. The Cropps filed their lawsuit in state court in Oregon, and the court dismissed it for being barred under the California one-year limitations period for such claims. The Cropps appealed and argued that the Oregon trial court incorrectly concluded that the California limitations period applied because the greater contacts were outside of Oregon. The Cropps specifically argued that the Oregon two-year limitations period should instead apply to their claim, because Oregon has a substantial interest in having its law applied and there is no conflict-of-laws issue. Alternatively, the Cropps argued that the Oregon limitations period applied under the Oregon choice-of-law rules.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (De Muniz, J.)
Dissent (Rossman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
