Or. State Univ. v. Superior Court of San Diego Cnty.

*1182 I

INTRODUCTION

Oregon State University (Oregon State) petitions for a peremptory writ of mandate directing the superior court to vacate an order overruling Oregon State's demurrer to George A. Sutherland's first amended complaint (complaint) and to enter a new order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend.

*1183 Oregon State contends the challenged order violates the federal Constitution's full faith and credit clause (Clause) ( U.S. Const., art IV, § 1 ) because the complaint does not and cannot allege Sutherland's compliance with the *35 Oregon Tort Claims Act's 180-day claims notice provision. ( Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 30.275 , subds. (1), (2)(b).) 1 Sutherland counters the Clause does not require his compliance with the provision because requiring compliance would violate California's public policy by effectively depriving him of a remedy against Oregon State. Sutherland alternatively contends, if the Clause does require compliance with the provision, he can amend the complaint to plead facts showing compliance.

We agree the superior court should have sustained Oregon State's demurrer because the Oregon Tort Claims Act's claims notice provision is entitled to…