646.080
Special services to customers.
No person engaged in commerce or food commerce, or both, in the course of such
commerce, shall discriminate in favor of one purchaser against another
purchaser or purchasers of a commodity, or service, or output of a service
trade, bought for resale, with or without processing, by contracting to furnish
or furnishing, or by contributing to the furnishing of any services or
facilities connected with the processing, handling, sale or offering for sale
of such commodity, or service, or output of a service trade, purchased upon
terms not accorded to all purchasers on proportionally equal terms.
Notes of Decisions
Top Serv. Body Shop, Inc. v. Allstate Ins., 582 P.2d 1365 (Or. 1978).
“” While, for the purposes of this opinion, we treat Allstate as a "purchaser” of repairs (including parts and materials) which it was obligated to insurance claimants to pay, plaintiff does not contend that Allstate negotiated these repair services "for resale” to its claimants.”
Barber v. Unitus Cmty. Credit Union (D. Or. 2023).
· cites it 2× “State Purchaser Discrimination Claim Another claim that Plaintiff brings is under ORS § 646.080. However, this statute only prohibits discrimination “in favor of one purchaser against another purchaser” in the context of “bluying| for resale.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.