Bewley v. Evanite Fiber Corp.

826 P.2d 74, 111 Or. App. 314, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 332
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedFebruary 12, 1992
DocketCV90-1044; CA A68484
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 826 P.2d 74 (Bewley v. Evanite Fiber Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bewley v. Evanite Fiber Corp., 826 P.2d 74, 111 Or. App. 314, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 332 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

ROSSMAN, J.

In this breach of contract case, plaintiff employee appeals from a summary judgment in favor of defendant employer. Plaintiff asks us to determine the effect of a disclaimer contained on page 1 of defendant’s employment “guidelines:”

“These guidelines are not intended to be a contract and do not create any contract rights. Revisions to these provisions may be made from time to time as warranted.”

According to plaintiff, the guidelines “are express promises which create contract rights in the plaintiff despite the existence of a one sentence disclaimer” and, therefore, the effect to be given the disclaimer is a fact question for the jury.

We do not reach that issue. In conjunction with its motion for summary judgment, defendant submitted the affidavit of plaintiffs supervisor that said that plaintiff was discharged for neglect of duty and insubordination. Under the guidelines, those behaviors constitute “gross misconduct” and are bases for immediate discharge. Accordingly, defendant contends, even if the guidelines constitute a contract of employment, it complied with the contract in discharging plaintiff.

Plaintiff did not file a counter-affidavit or present any evidence to contradict the assertions contained in defendant’s affidavit. Plaintiff apparently relies on his pleadings to create a factual issue regarding a breach of contract. However, in the absence of a counter-affidavit or other conflicting evidence, the contents of defendant’s affidavit are taken as true. ORCP 47D.1 Therefore, the testimony is undisputed that plaintiff was discharged in accordance with the terms of the guidelines, and the summary judgment was appropriate.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gua v. Dept. of Rev. (250037G)
Oregon Tax Court, 2025
Caplener v. United States National Bank
831 P.2d 22 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
826 P.2d 74, 111 Or. App. 314, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bewley-v-evanite-fiber-corp-orctapp-1992.