PLAINTIFF’S FOURTEENTH STATUS REPORT – Page 2 1558 SW Nancy Way, Suite 101, Bend, OR 97702

Phone: (541) 617-0555 Fax: (541) 617-0984

tim@rdwyer.com

TIMOTHY L. WILLIAMS, OSB No. 034940

E-Mail: tim@rdwyer.com

Dwyer Williams Cherkoss Attorneys, P.C.

1558 SW Nancy Way, Suite 101

Bend, OR 97702

Phone: 541.617.0555

Fax: 541.617.0984

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION

Pursuant to the Court’s May 5, 2020 Minute Order (Dkt. 44), Plaintiff provides the 

following status of the related underlying case, Benjamin McCormick v. State of Oregon, Oregon 

Supreme Court Case No. S066206:

1. On May 21, 2020, the Oregon Supreme Court issued an opinion in that matter, 

reversing, in part, the Oregon Court of Appeals’ opinion and remanding the matter to 

the Oregon Court of Appeals for further proceedings. McCormick v. State of Oregon,

366 Or 452 (2020). 

2. Specifically, the Oregon Supreme Court held that Oregon’s recreational use immunity 

statute, ORS 105.682, is applicable where a governmental entity has facilitated use of 

the subject waterway by making said use possible by creating access and developing 

BENJAMIN MCCORMICK,

Plaintiff,

vs.

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:15-cv-01363-MO

PLAINTIFF’S FOURTEENTH STATUS

REPORT

Case 3:15-cv-01363-MO Document 45 Filed 07/15/20 Page 1 of 2
PLAINTIFF’S FOURTEENTH STATUS REPORT – Page 2 1558 SW Nancy Way, Suite 101, Bend, OR 97702

Phone: (541) 617-0555 Fax: (541) 617-0984

tim@rdwyer.com

land for that use. Id. at 473-474. However, it also held that the Oregon Court of 

Appeals erred in failing to address Plaintiff’s argument that the $5 fee charged for use 

of the subject day area prevented application of ORS 105.682 altogether. Id. at 474.

3. The Oregon Court of Appeals has yet to set further briefing dates, argument dates nor 

issue an opinion on the remanded matter.

Given the Oregon Supreme Court rendered its opinion as to whether or not a landowner 

enjoys the benefit of ORS 105.682 based on certain facts, including whether or not the owner of 

the subject land facilitated access to an area which the member of the public otherwise had a right 

to utilize, discovery in this matter will need to be had on that issue. Further, given the Oregon 

Supreme Court also left open the issue of whether an exchange of money, including the subject $5 

fee, renders ORS 105.682 inapplicable, discovery in this matter will need to be had on that issue. 

Finally, given the fact that there remains an open question as to Defendant’s relation to the land at 

issue, including any interplay with the State of Oregon, discovery in this matter will need be had 

on that issue as well.

On July 15, 2020, counsel for both parties conferred, and respectfully request that this 

matter continue to be abated until the parties in the state action receive a response from the Oregon 

Court of Appeals concerning the remanded issues.

If the Court needs any further information as to the above, counsel for Plaintiff would be 

happy to provide it.

Dated: July 15, 2020.

DWYER WILLIAMS CHERKOSS

ATTORNEYS, P.C.

By: s/ Tim Williams 

Tim Williams, OSB No. 034940 

Of Attorneys for Plaintiff

Trial Attorneys: Same

Case 3:15-cv-01363-MO Document 45 Filed 07/15/20 Page 2 of 2