Edgar Numrich v. Uwemedimoh Ntekpere
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Edgar T. Numrich appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his diversity action alleging state law violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1030 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Numrich’s claims for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and negligent infliction of emotional distress because he failed to allege a relationship with defendant that created a heightened duty of care. See Onita Pac. Corp. v. Trs. of Bronson, 315 Or. 149 , 843 P.2d 890, 896 (1992) (negligence claims for economic loss must be “predicated on some duty of the negligent actor to the injured party beyond the common law duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm”); Paul v. Providence Health Sys.-Oregon, 237 Or. App. 584 , 240 P.3d 1110, 1119 (2010), aff'd on other grounds, 351 Or. 587 , 273 P.3d 106 (2012) (to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress without alleging physical injury, a plaintiff must identify a heightened duty of care).