DocketNumber: 09-35665
Judges: Kleinfeld, Bea, Ikuta
Filed Date: 5/18/2010
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/5/2024
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 18 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GREG WILBERGER, as personal No. 09-35665 representative of the Estate of Brooke Wilberger, decedent, D.C. No. 6:06-cv-00714-AA Plaintiff - Appellant, MEMORANDUM * v. CREATIVE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Ann L. Aiken, Chief District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted May 7, 2010 Portland, Oregon Before: KLEINFELD, BEA and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. The district court properly applied a foreseeability analysis to Wilberger’s negligence claim, as required by Fazzolari v. Portland Sch. Dist. No. 1J, 734 P.2d * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. 1326, 1336 (Or. 1987). Even assuming that Joel Courtney’s intervening criminal act did not bar liability to Creative Building Maintenance (CBM) in all circumstances, cf. Buchler v. State ex rel. Or. Corr. Div.,853 P.2d 798
, 804–05 (Or. 1993), Wilberger’s claim fails under Oregon’s general foreseeability principles, see Washa v. Or. Dep’t of Corr.,979 P.2d 273
, 282 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). It is undisputed that CBM had no relationship to the victim. There is no evidence that CBM had any clients in Corvallis, where the abduction occurred, or that Courtney was in Corvallis for any reason related to his employment with CBM. Even if CBM should have been aware of Courtney’s twenty-year-old criminal convictions, CBM could not have reasonably foreseen that, by hiring Courtney and giving him access to a van, Courtney would encounter the victim in Corvallis and engage in criminal conduct resulting in the victim’s death. Seeid. at 283.
We therefore uphold the district court’s determination that CBM is not liable for negligence here. In light of our conclusion, we need not reach Wilberger’s claim that the district court erred in making a credibility determination regarding Jose Lomeli. AFFIRMED.