Busch v. McInnis: Oregon Supreme Court and a $13.5 Million Injury Verdict
Illustrative image — not a photograph from Busch v. McInnis Waste Systems, Inc.
A catastrophic injury can involve losses that extend far beyond medical bills.
In Busch v. McInnis Waste Systems, Inc., 366 Or 628 (2020), an Oregon jury awarded more than $13.5 million to a pedestrian who suffered an above-the-knee amputation after being struck by a garbage truck in a downtown Portland crosswalk. The central issue that ultimately reached the Oregon Supreme Court was whether Oregon’s then-existing statutory cap could reduce the jury’s $10.5 million noneconomic-damages award to $500,000.
The Oregon Supreme Court held that applying the cap to the plaintiff’s common-law personal-injury claim violated Article I, section 10, of the Oregon Constitution and affirmed the Court of Appeals.
Larry Tran Law did not represent the plaintiff in this case. The verdict discussed below was obtained by other attorneys in a separate matter and is presented for general informational purposes. Past results do not guarantee or predict the outcome of another case.
What Happened
Scott Busch was walking through a downtown Portland crosswalk with the right-of-way when a garbage truck operated by McInnis Waste Systems struck him.
According to the Oregon Supreme Court’s opinion, Busch remained conscious during the collision and suffered catastrophic injuries to his leg. His leg ultimately had to be amputated above the knee.
McInnis admitted liability, so the dispute at trial centered largely on damages.
The jury awarded Busch:
$3,021,922 in economic damages
$10,500,000 in noneconomic damages
More than $13.5 million total
The trial court then applied the version of ORS 31.710 that existed at the time and reduced the $10.5 million noneconomic-damages award to $500,000.
What the Oregon Supreme Court Decided
The Oregon Supreme Court considered whether applying the statutory damages cap to Busch’s claim violated the remedy clause of Article I, section 10, of the Oregon Constitution.
The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals and concluded that the cap, as applied to Busch’s common-law personal-injury claim against a private defendant, impermissibly deprived him of a constitutionally adequate remedy.
The circuit court’s judgment applying the cap was reversed, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings.
Why Noneconomic Damages Mattered
Economic damages and noneconomic damages compensate different kinds of loss.
Under current ORS 31.705, economic damages include objectively verifiable monetary losses such as medical expenses, lost income, impairment of earning capacity, and certain other financial losses.
Noneconomic damages include subjective, nonmonetary losses such as:
pain;
mental suffering;
emotional distress;
inconvenience; and
interference with normal and usual activities.
Those losses can be especially significant in a catastrophic-injury case involving permanent disability or amputation.
In Busch, the jury placed the value of the plaintiff’s noneconomic losses at $10.5 million.
The case therefore illustrates why serious personal-injury claims cannot always be evaluated simply by adding up medical bills and lost wages. Permanent physical limitations, pain, loss of independence, and interference with ordinary life can constitute a substantial part of the harm.
Oregon Law Has Changed Since Busch
This point is important because Busch was decided under an earlier version of ORS 31.710.
The current statute no longer imposes that $500,000 cap on ordinary personal-injury claims where the injured person survives. Today, ORS 31.710 is expressly titled “Limitation on award for noneconomic damages in claim for wrongful death” and applies the $500,000 limit to specified wrongful-death claims, subject to the statute’s exceptions.
That change resulted from legislation enacted after Busch.
So the takeaway from Busch today is not that every Oregon personal-injury plaintiff must litigate the constitutionality of a $500,000 cap. Rather, Busch remains important because it demonstrates how Oregon courts analyzed the constitutional right to a remedy and because it provides a striking example of the difference between economic and noneconomic damages in a catastrophic-injury case.
What Can Be Included in an Oregon Personal-Injury Claim?
Depending on the facts, an Oregon personal-injury claim may involve damages such as:
past and future medical expenses;
lost income;
impairment of future earning capacity;
rehabilitation and related care;
pain and suffering;
emotional distress;
disability;
inconvenience; and
interference with ordinary activities.
ORS 31.705 separately defines economic and noneconomic damages and requires them to be separately stated in the verdict.
Not every category applies in every case, and the value of a claim depends on the evidence, the injuries, causation, available insurance or other sources of recovery, and the law applicable to the particular matter.
What Injured People Can Learn From Busch
Busch highlights several practical points for people dealing with a serious injury claim.
First, the consequences of an injury may extend well beyond the initial medical treatment. A catastrophic injury can affect a person’s ability to work, move independently, participate in ordinary activities, and enjoy life in ways that continue long after the collision itself.
Second, documenting the full effect of the injury can matter. Medical records are important, but so can evidence of lost work, rehabilitation, functional limitations, future care needs, and how the injury has changed day-to-day life.
Third, early settlement discussions should be approached carefully when the long-term consequences of an injury are not yet clear. Once a claim is finally settled and released, later-discovered consequences generally cannot simply be added back into the settlement.
Finally, a large jury verdict in another case does not establish what a different case is worth. Every personal-injury matter turns on its own injuries, evidence, liability issues, insurance coverage, and other circumstances.
Questions After a Serious Injury in Oregon?
Larry Tran Law represents people injured in motor-vehicle collisions and other serious-injury matters throughout Oregon.
If you or a family member has suffered a serious injury, the matter can be evaluated to identify the damages and remedies that may be available under Oregon law.
Larry Tran Law
971-480-2100
larrytranlaw.com
This was not a Larry Tran Law case. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The law and available remedies depend on the facts and circumstances of each matter.