Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure – ORCP 4D

Oregon courts have personal jurisdiction over defendants whose acts committed outside of Oregon have effects in the state. Jurisdiction exists “[i]n any action claiming injury to person or property within this state arising out of an act or omission outside this state by the defendant”, where at the time of the injury either:

“D(1) Solicitation or service activities were carried on within this state by or on behalf of the defendant; or

D(2) Products, material, or things distributed processed, serviced, or manufactured by the defendants were used or consumed within this state in the ordinary course of trade.”

The injury must occur in Oregon; lingering effects in Oregon from an injury elsewhere do not suffice.  State ex rel Circus Circus Reno, Inc. v. Pope, 317 Or 151, 854 P2d 461 (1993) (plaintiff was hit by a liquor bottle thrown from the window of a Reno hotel).

The term “service,” as used here, means the performance of a business function auxiliary to the production or distribution of products, materials, or things. Columbia Boat Sales v. Island Packet Yachts, 105 Or App 85, 88, 803 P2d 283 (1990).  “The wrongful use of a civil proceeding is not conduct associated with production or distribution in the sense contemplated by the rule.”  Portland Trailer & Equipment, Inc. v. A-1 Freeman Moving & Storage, Inc., 166 Or App 651, 656, 5 P3d 604 (2000).  Unlike some other courts, Oregon does not recognize co-conspirator jurisdiction.  Geo-Culture, Inc. v. Siam Inv. Management S.A., 147 Or App 536, 542, 936 P2d 1063 (1997) (no jurisdiction over a defendant who had no direct contact with Oregon).