Zweizig v. Rote

Noneconomic damages for emotional injuries that do not originate from a bodily injury, death, or property damage are not subject to the $500,000 statutory damages cap in ORS 31.710(1).

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals certified a question asking if ORS 31.710(1) caps the "noneconomic damages awarded on an employment discrimination claim under ORS 659A.030." Zweizig sought damages for emotional injury and argued the phrase "including emotional injury" modifies "damages arising out of bodily injury" such that the damage cap applies only to emotional injuries emanating from a bodily injury. In response, Rote contended that "bodily injury" includes emotional injury. Noneconomic damages for emotional injuries that do not stem from a bodily injury, death, or property damage are not subject to the statutory damages cap in ORS 31.710(1). The Court explained the grammatical construction and logical reading of the text suggests that the damages limited by the statute must originate from (1) a bodily injury, (2) a death, or (3) property damage. The Court found that "bodily injury" is not commonly or legally understood to include emotional injuries. The Court further found that the statute's context and legislative history supported their readings of the section as a whole and the term "bodily injury." Here, Zweizig did not link his emotional injuries to a physical injury, death, or property damage, so the damages cap does not apply. The certified question is answered.