Fisk v. Johnson

── Fisk v. Johnson ── Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon Date: May 13, 2026 Author: Kistler Category: General 582 May 13, 2026 No. 409 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON Robert FISK, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Jolene JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. Jackson County Circuit Court 23CV40117; A187722 Timothy Barnack, Judge. Submitted March 18, 2026. Jolene Johnson filed the briefs pro se. R. Grant Cook, Quentin T. Plese, and Cook-Law Firm filed the brief for respondent. Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, Jacquot, Judge, and Kistler, Senior Judge. KISTLER, S. J. Reversed and remanded. Cite as 349 Or App 582 (2026) 583 KISTLER, S. J. Defendant appeals a judgment entered after man- datory court-annexed arbitration. She argues that she did not receive notice of the arbitration hearing and that that due process violation infected both the arbitration decision and the resulting judgment. We reverse and remand. We take the facts from the trial court record. Plaintiff filed this action alleging that defendant wrongfully took his dog, Marty. Defendant, who was self-represented, answered alleging that Marty was her dog, not plaintiff’s. The trial court assigned the case to mandatory court-annexed arbi- tration. See ORS 36.400 - 36.425 (establishing procedures for court-annexed arbitrations). The arbitration decision recites that the arbitrator set a date for the hearing and notified the parties of that date by first-class mail. Defendant did not appear. In defendant’s absence, the arbitrator found that plaintiff had established a prima facie case and issued a deci- sion and award in plaintiff’s favor. The award gave plaintiff possession of Marty and ordered defendant to pay plaintiff approximately $8,000 in fees and damages. The arbitrator filed the arbitration decision and award with the court on March 21, 2025. Five days later, defendant filed a motion to “appeal court decision.”1 In sup- port of her motion, defendant stated under penalty of per- jury, “I did not receive any notifications or mail of when my court date was. [T]herefore, I was not at the date of my hear- ing. I am asking for a new hearing.” Defendant also summa- rized the evidence that she would have offered at the hear- ing. Plaintiff did not file a response to the motion. On March 27, the trial court entered an order grant- ing defendant’s motion. Five days later, on its own motion, the court vacated its March 27 order and then denied defen- dant’s motion to appeal the arbitration decision. The court did not explain why it denied the motion. It stated only that it had done so “[a]fter further review.” On April 11, the clerk’s office notified the arbitra- tor and the parties that it had not received a judgment based on the arbitrator’s decision and award filed more than 1 We understand “court decision” to refer to the arbitration decision. 584 Fisk v. Johnson 20 days earlier. The notice observed that, when no timely request for a trial de novo is received, a judgment should be entered based on the arbitrator’s decision and award. See ORS 36.425(3); UTCR 13.240. Plaintiff also moved to enter a judgment based on the arbitrator’s decision and award. On April 24, 2024, the court entered a judgment based on the decision and award. Defendant appeals that judgment. Before turning to the parties’ arguments on appeal, we briefly describe the statutory procedure that gives rise to the appeal. ORS 36.400 provides for mandatory referral of certain actions to court-annexed arbitration, subject to the exceptions noted in ORS 36.405. ORS 36.425(1) provides that, after notice and a hearing, the arbitrator shall file the arbitration decision and award with the court. A party who is aggrieved by the decision and award ca