Mesch v. Unity Center for Behavioral Health

── Mesch v. Unity Center for Behavioral Health ── Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon Date: May 13, 2026 Author: Powers Category: General No. 403 May 13, 2026 463 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON Estate of Jacob Latif Mesch, by and through its Personal Representative Leila Hotaki MESCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITY CENTER FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, abn for Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center; Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center; Legacy Health; Oregon Health and Science University; and Oregon Health & Science University Medical Group, Defendants-Respondents. Multnomah County Circuit Court 21CV01558; A179040 Robert Durham, Judge. Argued and submitted May 29, 2024. Nadia H. Dahab argued the cause for appellant. Also on the briefs was Sugerman Dahab. On the reply brief was John M. Coletti and Paulson Coletti Trial Attorneys PC. Janet M. Schroer argued the cause for respondents Unity Center for Behavioral Health, abn for Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center, Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center, and Legacy Health. Also on the brief were Hillary A. Taylor, Hart Wagner LLP and Keating Jones Hughes PC. Jay W. Beattie argued the cause for respondents Oregon Health and Science University and Oregon Health & Science University Medical Group. Also on the brief was Katie M. Eichner and Lindsay Hart, LLP. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, Powers, Judge, and Hellman, Judge. POWERS, J. Affirmed. Hellman, J., dissenting. 464 Mesch v. Unity Center for Behavioral Health Cite as 349 Or App 463 (2026) 465 POWERS, J. In this wrongful death action, plaintiff, who is the mother and personal representative of the decedent, J, appeals from a judgment entered for defendants on her claims of neg- ligence. This case arises out of the tragic death of J, who after contemplating jumping from a bridge, had been taken to the psychiatric emergency room at Unity Center for Behavioral Health (Unity). About 10 hours later, Unity allowed J to leave at his request after determining that he did not meet the detention criteria for an involuntary hold, and two days later, he shot himself and died. Plaintiff asserted negligence claims on behalf of J and against defendants, which include Unity, Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center, which operates Unity, and Oregon Health and Science University and Oregon Health & Science University Medical Group, which provide medical staff for Unity. The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants on the ground that ORS 426.335(5) immunized them from liability on plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff challenges that ruling on appeal, asserting that ORS 426.335(5) does not apply to decisions to not detain a person, that genuine issues of material fact preclude sum- mary judgment, and that Article I, section 10, of the Oregon Constitution bars application of ORS 426.335(5) in this case. As explained below, we construe ORS 426.335(5) and con- clude that a decision—whether to detain or not to detain a person—based on the detention criteria in ORS 426.232 is an action that ORS 426.335(5) covers, and that the phrase “good faith, on probable cause” is a standard of honest, sub- jective belief, based on substantial, objective evidence that more likely than not the person does, or does not, meet the detention criteria. Applying that construction to this case, we conclude that defendants did establish as a matter of law on uncontroverted evidence that ORS 426.335(5) immu- nizes them from plaintiff’s claims. Finally, we conclude that Article I, section 10, does not bar application of ORS 426.335(5) here. Accordingly, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND Because this case is on review following the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants, we review for errors of law and “will affirm if there are no 466 Mesch v. Unity Center f