The brief argues that federal and Oregon laws don’t allow arbitration agreements to be enforced if one party fails to pay its fees.
OCJ hosted our first CLE Event and Networking Reception on March 29 at the Oregon State Bar Conference Center in Tigard.
Celebrating important victories for Oregon consumers
Earlier this month, members of OCJ’s legal team (attorney Matt Kirkpatrick and paralegal Lucia Becchetti) joined attorney Matthew Sutton in Medford, prevailing on multiple claims in a trial to find justice for a southern Oregon woman against family law practice, Rise Law Group, Inc (Rise).
Our policy team is joined this winter by two new interns in their last year of law school: Taylor Westlund (she/her) and Devon Gonzalez-Yoxtheimer (they/them).
Last spring, OCJ set the stage to regularly seek the input of consumers through a representative statewide survey. In October 2023, we built on those results and asked new questions to understand how a variety of consumer issues are experienced throughout Oregon.
While still on track to begin broadly taking consumer clients later this year as announced last November, we are thrilled to share that just before the new year, OCJ filed our first consumer case!
At the end of November, OCJ successfully petitioned to intervene on the PacifiCorp docket with the Oregon Public Utility Commission, which sets a limit to future lawsuit awards strictly to "actual" damages for property and loss of life.
OCJ is championing four pieces of pro-consumer legislation during the short legislative session to expand and modernize protections for Oregonians.
Founding Oregon Consumer Justice board member, Justin Baxter, has stepped down from our Board of Directors following his significant tenure, offering tremendous service and leadership to this organization.
OCJ is proud to be part of Fair Shot for All, a coalition of Oregonians, community organizations, and labor unions who have spent a decade fighting for racial, gender, and economic justice in Oregon.
The brief supports the plaintiffs against Tillamook, arguing that the decision in question undermines consumer protection by wrongly dismissing claims of overpayment due to false advertising.
