Court Stays the Course -- Denies Defendants' Latest Attempt to Delay Justice
We are pleased to share that, on May 7, 2026, the Multnomah County Circuit Court issued a significant order in Multnomah County’s ongoing litigation against major fossil fuel companies. In a decisive ruling, Judge Adele J. Ridenour denied the defendants' joint motion to stay proceedings, which sought to halt the County’s case pending a U.S. Supreme Court decision in a separate Colorado matter.
As addressed in recent posts, the motion to stay was the latest in defendants’ well-orchestrated campaign to stall the County’s claims as climate-related risks, impacts and costs accelerate at an ever-increasing rate.
Key Takeaways from the Court’s Order:
Recognition of Existing Delays: Judge Ridenour explicitly noted that this case, which was filed in June 2023, is already well beyond Oregon's timelines for trial under UTCR 7.030(4), which provides that complex actions like this should be set for trial within two years of filing.
Prejudice to the County: The Court found that the County demonstrated potential prejudice from any further multi-month or year-long stay.
Risk of Losing Evidence: A primary concern cited by the Court was the "ongoing risk of loss of evidence," specifically noting that aging witnesses' memories may fade as time passes.
Judicial Economy: The order clarified that judicial economy is not served by waiting for an indeterminate amount of time on a Supreme Court decision whose outcome and jurisdictional reach remain uncertain.
In reaching this decision, Judge Ridenour joins judges in other jurisdictions including King County, Washington and Hawaii Circuit Court who rejected similar fossil fuel motions seeking to indefinitely delay climate accountability lawsuits.
Next up in Multnomah County’s case are the hearings of 25 joint and separate defense motions to dismiss the County’s claims for alleged lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim and motions to strike under Oregon’s Anti-SLAPP statute.
These motions, which the County claims are wholly lacking in merit and filed solely for purposes of delay, were filed in February 2025. After being assigned to the case in early 2026 after Judge Benjamin Soude unexpectedly recused himself, Judge Ridenour proposed hearing dates as early as March 2026, which the County accepted. Defendants—represented by some of the world’s largest law firms—asserted scheduling conflicts and requested later dates. Over the County’s objection, the court accommodated the defense by scheduling hearings on their jurisdiction and failure to state claims motions to dismiss for June 24–25, 2026, and scheduling hearings on their Anti-SLAPP motions to strike for October 13-15, 2026.
If the motions are defeated, the County will, at long last, be able to conduct vital discovery and advance the case to trial where the defendants will finally face a public reckoning for the harms their actions have inflicted on the community.
See also:
