U-Cart Concrete of Eugene, Inc. v. Farmers Insurance
Docket: TC 78-2736, CA 14710, SC 26963
Court: Oregon Supreme Court; November 17, 1980; Oregon; State Supreme Court
Plaintiffs objected to defendants’ bill of costs and disbursements following the denial of a petition for review by this court. The court ruled that defendants cannot recover costs as a prevailing party since, upon denying the petition, the court did not affirm or reverse any judgment, nor did it determine the correctness of the Court of Appeals' decision. The court emphasized that costs are a statutory entitlement and are typically awarded to the prevailing party in a judgment. In this instance, there was no judgment to support an award of costs, as the court did not entertain an appeal but merely declined to review the case. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion not to award costs and disallowed the claim for printing expenses, as recovery for disbursements is contingent on entitlement to costs. Objections to the bill of costs and disbursements have been upheld, resulting in the denial of the bill. Historical case law suggested that costs could be recovered under the Oregon Constitution, specifically Article VII, Amendment 3. However, the precedent set by Gowin v. Heider clarified that this constitutional provision cannot be used to award costs on appeal in a manner different from statutory requirements. Following this, the establishment of the Court of Appeals in 1969 granted it exclusive appeal jurisdiction, except for cases from the Oregon Tax Court, effectively making the Supreme Court primarily a reviewing body. ORS 20.070 references costs "on an appeal" without addressing cases reviewed by the Supreme Court, leading to uncertainty about the continued validity of Gowin in such contexts. Nonetheless, the court refrains from addressing the viability of Gowin as it is not essential for the current decision.