Fisk v. Johnson

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals held that a self-represented defendant’s timely written motion seeking to appeal a court-annexed arbitration decision and obtain a new hearing should have been treated as a notice of appeal and request for trial de novo under ORS 36.425(2)(a). The court concluded that the trial court erred by denying that request and entering judgment based on the arbitration award. The judgment was reversed and remanded.

Holdings

1. A timely written motion seeking to appeal the arbitration decision and requesting a new hearing should be treated as a written notice of appeal and request for trial de novo under ORS 36.425(2)(a), even though the motion did not track the statutory language verbatim and included an additional explanation for the request.
2. Johnson preserved her objection; she was not required to renew her request for a new hearing after the trial court had already denied it.
3. ORS 36.425(3) does not create an absolute bar to an appeal challenging the trial court's post-arbitration denial of a timely statutory request for a trial de novo.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Johnson's timely motion to "appeal court decision" and request for a new hearing qualified as a written notice of appeal and request for trial de novo under ORS 36.425(2)(a).
2. Whether ORS 36.425(3)'s prohibition on appealing a judgment based on a court-annexed arbitration award barred appellate review of the trial court's denial of Johnson's statutory request for a trial de novo.
3. Whether Johnson preserved her objection by failing to renew her request for a new hearing after Fisk moved for entry of judgment.
4. Whether the denial of a new hearing violated due process.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded