Summary
The Oregon Supreme Court held that restitution for goods stolen from a retail seller must be based on the reasonable value of the goods in the market to which the seller would resort to replace them, generally the wholesale market. The retailer may also recover additional proven economic losses, including lost profits, but the state did not prove such losses here. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and the trial court’s judgment and remanded for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- What measure of economic damages applies when goods are stolen from a retail seller and are not recovered?
- Under ORS 137.106, may a retail seller receive restitution based on the retail price of stolen goods without proof of additional losses?
- Whether the retail seller's restitution is limited to the reasonable wholesale value of the stolen jeans when the state fails to prove additional economic damages.
Holdings
- When goods for sale are stolen from a retail seller and are not recovered, the measure of economic damages for criminal restitution is the reasonable market value of the goods at the time and place of conversion, measured by the market to which the seller would resort to replace the goods, generally the wholesale market.
- A retail seller may recover additional economic losses, including lost profits, but those losses must be proved; they may not be presumed from the retail price of the stolen goods.
- Because the state did not prove that Macy's incurred damages in addition to the reasonable value of the stolen jeans, Macy's recovery is limited to the wholesale value of the jeans.
Key quotations
“A defendant must pay criminal restitution to a victim in the amount that equals the full amount of the victim’s economic damages.” (at 797)
“The seller also is entitled to recover other “economic damages,” including lost profits, but they must be proved.” (at 807)
“The market that determines that reasonable value is the market to which the seller would resort to replace the stolen goods, generally the wholesale market.” (at 807)
Factual background
Defendant shoplifted 15 pairs of jeans from a Macy's retail department store and was convicted of second-degree theft. The state sought restitution based on the retail price of the stolen jeans, while defendant argued that restitution should be based on Macy's wholesale replacement cost plus any additional losses, such as proven lost profits. The state presented no proof of additional damages beyond the value of the stolen goods.
Procedural history
Defendant was convicted in Multnomah County Circuit Court of second-degree theft after shoplifting 15 pairs of jeans from Macy's. The trial court ordered restitution based on the retail value of the jeans, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Oregon Supreme Court reversed both decisions and remanded for further proceedings concerning restitution.
Remand instructions
The case was remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings to determine restitution consistent with the opinion, including the reasonable wholesale value of the jeans and any additional economic losses proved by the state.