Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Oregon addresses defendants’ motion to dismiss James E. Jacobson, Jr.’s claims arising from his tenancy at the Gresham Park Apartments. The court denies dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, concluding that Jacobson’s ADA claim presents a colorable federal claim and is not subject to the Federal Tort Claims Act’s exhaustion requirement. The court concludes that Oregon claim-preclusion principles bar the claims based on a prior state-court judgment and dismisses the action with prejudice.
Holdings
- The court had subject matter jurisdiction over Jacobson's Title III ADA claim, and Defendants did not establish that the FTCA's administrative-exhaustion requirement applied to that claim or to Jacobson's claims generally.
- Oregon claim preclusion barred Jacobson's federal and state claims because the prior state-court action proceeded to a final judgment with prejudice, involved the same parties or their privies, and concerned claims arising from the same factual transaction or series of related transactions.
- The pending appeal did not prevent the state-court judgment from operating as res judicata or claim preclusion under Oregon law.
- The action was properly dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend because the claim-preclusion bar made amendment futile.
Questions Presented
- Whether the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Jacobson allegedly failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
- Whether claim preclusion under Oregon law barred Jacobson's federal and state claims based on the prior state-court judgment.
- Whether the pending state-court appeal prevented the prior judgment from having claim-preclusive effect.
- Whether the action should be dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend because amendment would be futile.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (52)
- Bates v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co., 849 F.3d 846, 847 (9th Cir. 2017)(followed)
- Tohono O'odham Nation v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 138 F.4th 1189, 1194 n.4 (9th Cir. 2025)(followed)
- Mauia v. Petrochem Insulation, Inc., 5 F.4th 1068, 1071 (9th Cir. 2021)(followed)
- Hogan v. NW Tr. Servs., Inc., No. 10-cv-06027-HO, 2010 WL 1872990, at *3 (D. Or. May 7, 2010), aff'd, 441 F. App'x 490 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
- Luckey v. Mitchell, No. 22-16556, 2023 WL 6389399, at *1 (9th Cir. Oct. 2, 2023)(followed)
- Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 27 (1992)(followed)
- Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc)(followed)
- Hebrard v. Nofziger, 90 F.4th 1000, 1006-07 (9th Cir. 2024)(followed)
- Chavez v. Robinson, 817 F.3d 1162, 1167-68 (9th Cir. 2016)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 52.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…